These are my scant notes on what I see are serious issues in the current Draft Application Guidebook version, besides the trademark ones. I just talked about these in our meeting here in Seoul. According to the DAG, failing to comply with deadlines has no consequences for Icann, only for the applicant. UDRP in the delegation process will be outsourced only, at additional cost. Not only $$$, but window of opportunity and other costs should be taken into account in accruing responsibilities for delays. String contention: what exactly is "community priority (comparative) evaluation"? What are the precise criteria for deciding on auction of this evaluation to resolve string contention? Regarding the TLD Application System (TAS), the DAG v.3 says "ICANN will take commercially reasonable steps to protect all applicant data submitted from unauthorized access, but cannot warrant against the malicious acts of third parties who may, through system corruption or other means, gain unauthorized access to such data." E.g, what would be the refund policy (besides other penalties) if data violation occurs and Icann is found responsible? The way this is formulated in DAG v.3, Icann takes very little (if any) responsbility for eventual misuse of applicants' data. What is precisely a "clearly delineated community"? Pre-delegation technical tests: the DAG v.3 says "Following execution of a registry agreement, the prospective registry operator must complete technical setup and show satisfactory performance on a set of technical tests before delegation of the gTLD into the root zone may be initiated." What are these tests? Icann relegates dispute resolution to third parties (UDR service providers). Are these technical tests also delegated? What are the qualifications/certifications for the group in charge of these tests and concluding reports? Etc etc etc... --c.a.