notes on DAG v3 (guidebook for new gTLD applicants)

[Carlos A. Afonso]

Yes, Konstantinos, right on! If we go through the doc very carefully, we
will just trash it. Frankly.

[] fraterno

--c.a.

Konstantinos Komaitis wrote:
> Please consider in this that there are communities (organized) but not
> recognized. What will happen with this? I refer to the Turkish part of
> Cyprus that can be considered as a community but not as a recognized state.
> If they apply and fail under the state provision will they be able to apply
> as a community?
>
> KK
>
>
> On 27/10/2009 03:11, "Carlos A. Afonso" <ca at CAFONSO.CA> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>