[ALAC] ICANN Seeks Input on gTLD Batching

[Alan Greenberg]

http://www.icann.org/en/news/announcements/announcement-29jul12-en.htm



ICANN Seeks Input on gTLD Batching

29 July 2012

Opportunity for Community Input: Processing of New gTLD Applications

At the Prague ICANN meeting, the new gTLD Program 
Committee decided to terminate Digital Archery, 
and instructed ICANN staff to proceed with the 
initial evaluation of applications as quickly as 
possible. This evaluation is in progress based on 
a tentative project plan that foresees the 
processing of applications in a single batch, and 
simultaneous release of results. ICANN believes 
this approach is consistent with the constraints 
that various parts of the community have in 
performing their respective roles in the 
evaluation process, and with the feedback 
received from the community at the Prague meeting.

This comment opportunity seeks input on 
requirements for an evaluation and delegation 
process consistent with previous root zone 
scaling discussions of smooth delegations, adding 
no more than 1,000 new gTLDs per year. This outcome can be achieved by the:

	a. timing of the release of evaluation results to applicants,

	b. timing of the release of applications into 
the pre-delegation steps of contract execution and pre-delegation testing,

	c. metering of delegations of new gTLDs into the root zone.

ICANN is committed to executing the evaluation 
and delegation process in a way that is equitable 
and meets ICANN's commitment to ensuring the 
security and stability of the DNS, consistent 
with previously established root zone scaling goals.

Please write to newgtld-input at icann.org with your 
input. Comments received by 19 August 2012 (UTC 00:00) will be considered.

Background

The concept of batching has been a part of the 
Applicant Guidebook since its first draft. Batching accomplishes three goals:

	1. Better management of the evaluation process 
by placing an upper bound on the number of 
evaluators necessary and the number of parallel 
evaluations occurring at any one time.

	2. Release of evaluation results to applicants 
according to a predictable schedule.

	3. Delegation of TLDs at a rate acceptable to 
the technical community, consistent with the root zone scaling discussion.

Based on the definitive information that ICANN 
now has about the pool of applications, and work 
on the evaluations to date, this comment process 
seeks input to meet requirements for goals #2 and #3.

Leading up to and during ICANN's meeting in 
Prague, the applicant and community positions on 
requirements for batching schemes that would 
control the evaluation, communication and 
delegation of applications were reported to be:

	a. The batching solution has to be equitable.

	b. The evaluation results have to be announced at the same time.

	c. Successful applications should proceed to 
delegation phase without undue delays.

	d. Delegation to the root must be at a smooth 
rate and must not exceed 1,000 per year.

	e. The GAC is planning to issue early warnings 
shortly after the Toronto ICANN meeting in October 2012.

	f. Consideration by the GAC of issues concerning 
GAC advice on contentious applications is not 
expected to be finalized before the Beijing meeting in April 2013.

During the root scaling discussion, it was agreed 
that ICANN would not delegate TLDs at a rate 
greater than 1,000 per year. This is because the 
primary challenge with maintaining root zone 
stability is controlling the rate of change to 
the root zone system and not the size of the root 
zone itself, meaning delegation should not occur 
at a rate of 1,000 delegations on a single day.

In Prague, the batching and prioritization method 
known as Digital Archery was terminated and 
eliminated from further consideration.

Recent Developments

Initial evaluation of new gTLD applications is underway.

Applications are being distributed to evaluators 
in a way that enables efficient processing.

ICANN has conducted pilot evaluations and had 
discussions with evaluators to accelerate the 
evaluation schedule. As a result of these 
discussions, the evaluation teams have committed 
to accelerate the evaluations substantially, 
while processing them in a single batch.

In Prague, a methodology was discussed where the 
smooth delegation of applications could occur by 
first releasing applications that passed initial 
evaluation without the need for clarifying 
questions, then releasing applications in order 
of the number of clarifying questions required, 
from fewest to highest. After analysis, this 
methodology proved unworkable because 80% to 90% 
of the total evaluation time is required to form 
and ask clarifying questions, so little smoothing would result.

The current plan indicates that initial 
evaluation of all applications, processed in a 
"single batch", can be completed in 11-12 months, 
possibly less ­ resulting in publication of results in June-July 2013.
	Note: It is planned that regular updates to 
applicants during the evaluation period will be 
provided. In addition to written reports, ICANN 
is looking into the use of a webinar / conference 
call format to deliver updates.

For applicants, releasing results in a single 
batch would mean that the first delegations would 
occur in late third quarter of 2013, six months later than originally expected.

Implications of GAC timing:

	The GAC plans to "issue any Early Warnings 
shortly after the Toronto ICANN meeting, in 
October 2012," meaning that Early Warnings would 
be received within the currently planned single evaluation period.
	
	Also, the GAC "is considering the implications 
of providing any GAC advice on gTLD applications. 
These considerations are not expected to be 
finalized before the Beijing meeting in April 
2013." This is shortly before the currently 
planned announcement of initial evaluation 
results (i.e., the schedule without additional 
accelerations beyond those stated above).

Statement of the Issue

While there will be some natural smoothing as 
applications take different paths through 
objections and contention resolution processes, 
there will still be a requirement for some method 
of metering applications into the delegation 
process. This is due to the relatively high 
number of applications that may reach 
pre-delegation steps at essentially the same 
time. A metering method has not yet been 
determined and will need to be developed.

Questions to be answered by comments

Submitted comments should specifically answer each of the following questions:

	1. Should the metering or smoothing consider 
releasing evaluation results, and transitioning 
applications into the contract execution and 
pre-delegation testing phases, at different times?

		a. How can applications be allocated to 
particular release times in a fair and equitable way?

		b. Would this approach provide sufficient smoothing of the delegation rate?

		c. Provide reasoning for selecting this approach.

	2. Should the metering or smoothing be 
accomplished by downstream metering of 
application processing (i.e., in the contract 
execution, pre-delegation testing or delegation phases)?

		a. How can applications be allocated to a 
particular timing in contract execution, 
pre-delegation testing, or delegation in a fair and equitable way?

		b. Provide reasoning for selecting this approach.

	3. Include a statement describing the level of 
importance that the order of evaluation and 
delegation has for your application.

Please write to newgtld-input at icann.org with your 
input. Comments received by 19 August 2012 (UTC 00:00) will be considered.