ARI Services letters on digital archery

The following two letters were sent from ARI Services over ICANN's 'digital archery' plan for splitting new gTLD applications into batches. The first letter was sent on 1 June 2012; the second (which appears first on this post) on 6 June 2012.

To: Cherine Chalaby – Chair Board gTLD committee; ICANN Board; ICANN staff

Dear Cherine,

Re: New gTLD Program – Digital Archery and Batching Processes

06 June 2012

This letter is a request to the Board and staff of ICANN to delay the launch of the digital archery batching mechanism and review, in Prague, the need to batch and the chosen mechanism.

Batching was included in ICANN's thinking because there were an unknown number of applications for new gTLDs. Batching had two major objectives:

• To manage ICANN resources within the New gTLD Program timeline; and
• To govern the number of TLDs added to the root each year.

We suggest that, given the data that is publically available, these two objectives can be met without batching and without a significant or unreasonable impact on timelines.

It is our view, and we believe the view of many applicants and the ICANN community generally, that batching and the chosen method of doing so will serve to increase the likelihood of confusion, frustration and uncertainty for Applicants. Applicants want a level playing field where they can all progress through the process at an equal rate. Batching is not something desired by Applicants.

We now know that approximately 1,900 applications have been received. Shortly the full list of applications will become public. This will enable an assessment of what are likely to be significant commonalities between many of the applications in terms of Applicant, string and back-end provider. Thus it will be possible to start to identify areas where ICANN staff can reasonably expect operational efficiencies in the Initial Evaluation process.

Given this, we believe that the Applicants and the ICANN community are likely to be supportive of an extension to the duration of Initial Evaluation for a reasonable time (for example 12 months in total rather than the 5-7 months per batch as currently proposed), if that meant all Applicants could complete Initial

Evaluation within a single process. We believe that such a change will lead to greater fairness and transparency in the process.

Once Initial Evaluation is complete, Applications will naturally progress to delegation at different rates, slowed by the barriers of:

• Extended evaluation;
• Contention resolution;
• Applicant's strategy and plans; and
• Contract negotiation.

This suggested timeline also enables the GAC to consider objections and the provision of GAC Advice over two face-to-face meetings (Toronto 2012 and Asia 2013).

In the event that ICANN resources become strained at the contract negotiation stage, a much simpler form "batching" could be used at that time to resolve that problem.

It should be noted that the extra time would also allow a longer time for string contention determination to occur as it would no longer be needed prior to the Initial Evaluation and could run concurrently with this process, once again, creating efficiencies.

We ask that ICANN staff delay the launch of the batching process, take the time until the Prague ICANN meeting to consider the options outlined in this letter and take the opportunity of the Prague meeting to discuss batching with the community.

We would be happy to provide more insight into this approach should it be required.

Yours sincerely,

Adrian Kinderis
Chief Executive Officer
ARI Registry Services

To: Dr. Steven D. Crocker, Chairman, ICANN Board of Directors; Mr. Rod Beckstrom, ICANN President and CEO; ICANN Board New gTLD Program Committee

01 June 2012

Dear Dr. Crocker,

Re: New gTLD Program – Digital Archery and Batching Processes

ARI Registry Services is supporting 161 applications and over 100 individual applicants for new gTLDs. As we approach the next phase of the application process, ARI Registry Services would like to provide comment and insight into this phase; in particular we would like to comment on the "batching" process that is currently being finalised.

Batching was initially proposed to deal with an unknown and potentially large number of applications. Had the early assumption that tens of thousands of applications would be received actually resulted, this would have posed a massive strain on ICANN's operational resources. Batching was then seen as an obvious method for allocation of those scarce resources. Now that the application window has closed and actual data is available,

ICANN is in the position to review this early assumption and determine if batching is required. Alternative processes may provide greater transparency and also alleviate the issues that are apparent in the suggested "digital archery".

There may be concerns over root scaling if the entire 1,900 applications are reviewed at once. There are, however, a number of gateways that will inherently moderate the process for different applications. These include: extended evaluation, contention sets, contract negotiation, and pre-delegation testing. In addition, an applicant's own personal timeline for go-live will have an impact.

It is the opinion of ARI Registry Services that the batching process, at least for evaluation, may not be required.

A deeper review by ICANN will reveal operational efficiencies that allow for a single, all-encompassing process that does not impact the overall timeline. We believe that the best course of action is for ICANN to solicit the input of the community at the upcoming ICANN Prague meeting, perform the necessary due diligence on the data now available, and then make a decision on a way forward.

The ultimate goal of this recommendation is to provide all applicants with a level playing field from which to launch a new gTLD.

These recommendations support the letter sent on 30 May 2012 to the ICANN Board entitled ‘Regarding "Digital Archery" batching method' by Theo Hnarakis, Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director of Melbourne IT.

To reiterate, we urge you to consider this position and undertake the following:

• A reconsideration of the proposed batching timeline, currently due to commence on 8 June 2012; and
• An investigation into alternatives presented by the community during the ICANN Prague meeting.

These recommendations are based on ICANN having the budget and the data to consider this approach without impacting the overall timeline.

Yours sincerely,

Adrian Kinderis
Chief Executive Officer
ARI Registry Services