[discuss] ICANN and IDNs with U-labels at the top leve

[Avri Doria]

On 02-Jan-14 16:44, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> What I don't like is the extent to which this has become a
> financial matter.

I dont like it much either.

Having allowed that to happen is an Ig issue.  It was a policy issue by 
ICANN community that said that the new gTLD application process should 
be self funded though allowance could be made for developing economies. 
  And it was ICANN staff policy that said the fees should be high enough 
to fund any possible legal challenge ICANN might face and should 
retroactively fund the policy work that had been done on new gTLDs, 
without also giving any consideration of developing economy applicants, 
while 'self funding' the application processing.

All this while Nation states were stating that new gTLDs should be free 
for Least Developed and Island economies.  And while the At-Large and 
NCSG was decrying the lack of timely and and adequate support programs 
for developig economies.  As Milton says, just about everything ICANN 
does is policy and the subject of wider Ig concerns.

There is expected to be another round.  To what exent does the larger 
community have anything to say about how the policies are structured for 
the next round.  What are the Ig implications of further round 
considerations?

While making the argument that Ig policy touches an IETF technical issue 
can be challenging at times, arguing that Ig policy touches on ICANN 
issues is easy.

To what extent should the problems you, Andrew and others bring up about 
ICANN and its policies be considered by ICANN in its further dealings?

avri