We are 10 days away from the submission deadline on the above
mentioned subject. I'm volunteering to collect the constituency
comments/statement. Is there any objection? If not, could you forward
any additional comments before Thursday 26; I will compile and post
the result by Saturday 28, for final review to be completed by Monday
30; submission to the council on Tuesday 31 Jan. Carlos, you may
inform the GNSO Secretariat accordingly, or else, if I don't hear any
objection by Monday 23, I will let Glen know that I am the focal
point for NCUC on this.

Regards,

Mawaki

--- Mawaki Chango <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> FYI - the NCUC appointee is still missing...
> 
> - mC
> 
> --- "[log in to unmask]"
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 18:52:55 +0100
> > From: "[log in to unmask]"
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: [gtld-council] New gTLDs policy development process
> > 
> > [To: gtld-council[at]gnso.icann.org]
> > 
> > The GNSO Council unanimously agreed at the GNSO meeting in
> > Vancouver on 
> > 2 December 2005 that the policy development process on the "Terms
> > of 
> > Reference for new gTLDs" be managed by the GNSO Council as a
> > committee 
> > of the whole according to the provision made in the ICANN bylaws,
> 
> > "section 8,
> > a. If the Council decides not to convene a task force, the
> Council
> > will 
> > request that, within ten (10) calendar days thereafter, each 
> > constituency appoint a representative to solicit the
> constituency's
> > 
> > views on the issue. Each such representative shall be asked to
> > submit a 
> > Constituency Statement to the Staff Manager within thirty-five
> (35)
> > 
> > calendar days after initiation of the PDP."
> > 
> > A "New gtld committee" meeting has been scheduled for 14 February
> > 2006.
> > 11:00 LA, 14:00 Washington, 19:00 UTC, Brussels 20:00 next day, 
> > Wednesday 15, 6:00am Melbourne.
> > 
> > A mailing list, with public archives can be found on page:
> > http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/
> > http://forum.icann.org/lists/gtld-council/
> > 
> > The address <[log in to unmask]> has been opened for all
> > work 
> > pertaining to the new gTLD policy development process.
> > 
> > All GNSO Council members and selected staff are subscribed to the
> > list.
> > 
> > The constituency representatives appointed to solicit the
> > constituency's 
> > views on the issue are:
> > Registrars Constituency - Ross Rader
> > gTLD Registries Constituency - Ken Stubbs
> > Commercial & Business Users C. - Philip Sheppard
> > Intellectual Property Interests C. - Caroline Chicoine
> > 
> > "Terms of Reference for New gTLDs"
> > 
> > 1. Should new generic top level domain names be introduced?
> > a. Given the information provided here and any other relevant 
> > information available to the GNSO, the GNSO should assess whether
> > there 
> > is sufficient support within the Internet community to enable the
> 
> > introduction of new top level domains. If this is the case the
> > following 
> > additional terms of reference are applicable.
> > 
> > 2. Selection Criteria for New Top Level Domains
> > a. Taking into account the existing selection criteria from
> > previous top 
> > level domain application processes and relevant criteria in
> > registry 
> > services re-allocations, develop modified or new criteria which 
> > specifically address ICANN's goals of expanding the use and
> > usability of 
> > the Internet. In particular, examine ways in which the allocation
> > of new 
> > top level domains can meet demands for broader use of the
> Internet
> > in 
> > developing countries.
> > 
> > b. Examine whether preferential selection criteria (e.g.
> sponsored)
> > 
> > could be developed which would encourage new and innovative ways
> of
> > 
> > addressing the needs of Internet users.
> > 
> > c. Examine whether additional criteria need to be developed which
> 
> > address ICANN's goals of ensuring the security and stability of
> the
> > 
> > Internet.
> > 
> > 3. Allocation Methods for New Top Level Domains
> > a. Using the experience gained in previous rounds, develop
> > allocation 
> > methods for selecting new top level domain names.
> > b. Examine the full range of allocation methods including
> auctions,
> > 
> > ballots, first-come first-served and comparative evaluation to
> > determine 
> > the methods of allocation that best enhance user choice while not
> 
> > compromising predictability and stability.
> > c. Examine how allocation methods could be used to achieve
> ICANN's
> > goals 
> > of fostering competition in domain name registration services and
> 
> > encouraging a diverse range of registry services providers.
> > 
> > 4. Policy to Guide Contractual Conditions for New Top Level
> Domains
> > a. Using the experience of previous rounds of top level domain
> name
> > 
> > application processes and the recent amendments to registry
> > services 
> > agreements, develop policies to guide the contractual criteria
> > which are 
> > publicly available prior to any application rounds.
> > b. Determine what policies are necessary to provide security and 
> > stability of registry services.
> > c. Determine appropriate policies to guide a contractual
> compliance
> > 
> > programme for registry services.
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Glen de Saint G�ry
> > GNSO Secretariat - ICANN
> > gnso.secretariat[at]gnso.icann.org
> > http://gnso.icann.org
> > 
>