[ga] New TLD Evaluation Process - Answers Please

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>]

Title: Help

 

 

Back in August I was asking where the Registry Evaluation Process reports were, as Appendix U of the Registry agreements stated that these should be available to the public (mostly by early summer) so that all constituencies could participate in the ongoing Evaluation Process in an informed manner with access to this central data.

 

I also asked when the actual New TLDs Evaluation Process would begin.

 

I received this reply from Vint Cerf:

 

"richard,

my understanding is that at least some, if not all, reports have been received but some contain proprietary information. Before these reports can be released in public form, they have to be redacted to preserve the confidentiality of proprietary data. Staff has simply been busy with other work so this is still on the task queue.

vint"

 

That was nearly two months ago (and it is now 6 months after most of this material should have been made available. How long does it take staff to get these documents online - and do they even exist?)

Rick Wesson then asked Vint:

 

"vint,
The data required in Appendix T and Appendix U are mostly statistical in nature which makes it hard to buy the confidentiality restrictions. My point is that ICANN is loosing its credibility, but telling us the reports are there make no difference if they cannot be reviewed."

 

To which Vint Cerf responded:

 

"I don't know that the reported material contains anything confidential but staff has to read it to find out.

vint"

 

Comment from Richard Henderson: "How long does it take staff to 'read' it?"

From John Berryhill:

 

"That's ridiculous.

It is up to the owner of proprietary information to make that determination.
If an unqualified disclosure is made to an outside party, i.e. ICANN, then
the information is by definition not proprietary.

How does ICANN staff determine whether material they have received from
someone else is proprietary to the party making the disclosure."

From Vint Cerf:

 

"John,

I agree - the point is that if the material is marked proprietary by supplier, staff will need to edit that part out before posting to the public.

vint"

 

Richard Henderson: Well it is over 6 months now since most of these documents should have been available to the public at the end of their confidentiality period (according to ICANN's own terms in Appendix U). How long does it take ICANN to "read" these documents, "edit out" confidentialities, and make the docs available for people to participate in the evaluation process?

From Bret Faussett:

 

"For most of the data, the confidentiality period has
expired. 

-- Bret"

 

Stuart Lynn then said:

 

"There is confusion in the question and some of the subsequent responses.

The appendices to which you refer have relevance to the evaluation
itself not to the NTEPPTF report. The task force did not require access to these appendices
or any other similar information in order to frame its
recommendations.

Stuart"

 

However, the point is, that these Registry reports are (according to AppendixU) available for people to see (obviously, since they are vital data in the evaluation process) and have been available for over 6 months (according to the terms of the Appendix). They should be available for ALL constituencies to study, and I find it inexplicable that they have been withheld. ICANN claims that it wants all constituencies to participate in DNS governance, and yet it is impossible to participate seriously if vital data is withheld.

 

I raised all this almost two months ago and STILL nothing seems to have been released. Given the importance of the New TLD Evaluation Process, this seems astonishing.

 

From Richard Henderson:

 

Stuart

I understand the fact that the NTEPPTF was used to decide how to proceed
with the NewTLD Evaluation Process, rather than carrying out that Evaluation
itself, but my point about the Appendix U documents is this:

Fourteen months after the .info Sunrise fiasco it does seem extraordinary that
the ICANN community as a whole does not have access to those documents which
Afilias was bound to provide - and to provide according to a very specific
timetable - which will equip the whole community to make more informed
judgments about what happened and how things could be improved.

The answers we have received to date do not confirm to the GA that Afilias
actually submitted all the required documentation or submitted it on time.
They do not adequately explain why they have remained unavailable for 6 months
beyond their confidentiality release dates (though many had no
confidentiality constraints anyway). They do not address the need for
information of central relevance to be made openly and transparently
available to the ICANN community.

My concern is that there is public frustration in some quarters (which I do
not necessarily share) that ICANN seems to be stalling on the release of any
further NewTLDs. At the same time, if the data from the Registries is
withheld (as it has been) then the various constituencies and the general
public are unable to develop their own understanding of the issues. It seems
too much like the ICANN Board wanting to control the flow of information and
string out the New TLDs Evaluation Process (which surely should be urgently
in process by now).

I realise that you have personally undertaken to define at Shanghai how the
process should be moved forward, but all parties with interests in the
administration of the DNS should have the right of access to this valuable
data - and not just the ICANN staff. The problem of staff not having time to
"review" this material is, frankly, unimpressive. When I was responsible for
hundreds of prisoners, I quite often suffered from staff shortages, but
priorities still had to be undertaken, and I was still accountable and
subject to open processes. Admittedly, blaming the "missing documents" on
staff shortages is consistent with your calls for more funding, but I am
astonished that time could not be found to release documents which were
never meant to be kept confidential anyway - the terms of Appendix U made
that perfectly clear to Afilias in the first place.

I can think of few issues more urgent than a complete and detailed review of
what went wrong (or right!) with the release of the NewTLDs. This Evaluation
has repercussions for the future shape of the DNS. I therefore hope that by
the Shanghai meeting we will have access to all relevant documents (as
permitted in the case of Appendix U) and that the Evaluation Process will be
set in motion properly (because at present it appears to be on ice).

Incidentally, what is the future of those who worked on the NTEPPTaskForce?
Will they be retained as a Task Force to move the work forward? Who exactly
is going to co-ordinate the Process? What mechanisms will there be for all
constituencies to participate? Will the Evaluation be carried out
objectively and independently of the ICANN Board?

The release of the NewTLDs was - as you must know - hugely controversial and
riven with problems which impacted on consumers (and registrars too). The
Evaluation cannot therefore be delayed much longer, or carried out without
full public access to data and all the facts.

Could you offer a date for the release of the Appendix U documents, so they
are accessible online? Thank you.

I repeat another question: What is the point of a "proof of concept" or an
evaluation process if you withhold the vital data which the Registries
involved were supposed to have submitted?

The greater part of this data should have been in the public domain over 6 months
ago. You've stated that you will explain how the Evaluation Process will be carried out, at Shanghai.

 

Well Shanghai has now arrived, and it's time to provide both the answers and the documents.

Regards

Richard H