[Beginning and end of session missing due to connectivity problems -- KM] UNIVERSAL RESOLVABILITY IS SOMETHING WHICH WE CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE ANY FAILURE OR ANY NEGATIVE IMPACT. WE HAVE TWO AREAS OF CONCERN. THE FIRST ONE IS THE -- WHAT WE -- I THINK THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN CALLING NOW THE MONITORING AND EARLY WARNING SYSTEM. I THINK THERE ARE OTHER TERMS, BUT, OKAY, SUZANNE CAN CORRECT ME, IF YOU WANT. >>SUZANNE WOOLF: NO NEED. >>THOMAS DE HAAN: THIS MONITORING AND EARLY WARNING SYSTEM, I WILL COMMENT TO THIS A LITTLE BIT LATER. THE SECOND ONE IS MORE ON OPERATIONAL ISSUES, RESOURCE ISSUES. AND TO BE SURE THAT WE DON'T FACE ANY CONGESTION, OPERATIONAL PROBLEMS, IN THE WHOLE CONTINUED INTEGRATION OF THE SYSTEM. LET ME PICK OUT ONLY TWO ADVICES WHICH I THINK ARE CRUCIAL IN THIS CONTEXT. WE HAVE FORMULATED SEVEN. I WILL TAKE TWO OF THEM CONCERNING THE MONITORING AND ALERTING SYSTEM. WHAT WE ADVISE TO THE BOARD IS THEY SHOULD CONTINUE IMPLEMENTING MONITORING AND ALERTING SYSTEM FOR TWO REASONS. TO ENSURE THAT ICANN CAN REACT PREDICTABLY AND QUICKLY WHEN THERE ARE INDICATORS THAT NEW THINGS ARE STRAINING THE ROOT ZONE SYSTEM . AND SECONDLY TO ENSURE THAT THE PROCESSES AND RESULTING RESTORATIVE MEASURES THAT FLOW FROM ITS RESULTS ARE FULLY DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICANT GUIDEBOOK BEFORE THE START OF THE FIRST APPLICATION ROUNDS. THE SECOND POINT IS, I THINK, IMPORTANT, ALSO FOR EXPECTATION MANAGEMENT TO APPLICANTS AND TO THE WHOLE COMMUNITY, THAT IF SOMEBODY -- IF SOMETHING COMES OUT OF THIS SYSTEM, THE EVALUATION OF THE FIRST ROUND OR BATCH, IT SHOULD HAVE DIRECT IMPACTS ON THE PROCESS. SECONDLY, WHAT WE ADVISE THE BOARD IS TO COMMIT TO DEFER THE LAUNCH OF THE SECOND ROUND OR BATCH, IF YOU WOULD, OF APPLICATIONS UNLESS AN EVALUATION SHOWS THAT THERE ARE INDICATIONS FROM MONITORING THE ROOT SYSTEM THAT THE FIRST ROUND DID NOT IN ANY WAY JEOPARDIZE SECURITY AND STABILITY OF THE ROOT ZONE SYSTEM. I THINK -- SUZANNE CAN, OF COURSE, ELABORATE ON THAT. I THINK THERE IS, OF COURSE, THIS INTENTION. POSSIBLY WHAT WE, AS GAC, WANT TO STRESS IS MORE THE EXPLICIT USE OF THE SYSTEM IN THE SENSE THAT IT'S NOT THAT WE CONTINUE SILENTLY IF THERE'S NOTHING HAPPENS. NOW WE WANT TO REALLY HAVE CONFIRMATION THAT IN NO WAY SECURITY AND STABILITY WAS JEOPARDIZED BY THE FIRST ROUNDS. I THINK I WILL GO VERY QUICKLY TO THE ONE ADVICE ON MORE THE OPERATIONAL RESOURCE ISSUES. WHAT WE ADVISE -- IT'S NOT AN ADVICE, IT'S MORE A CONCERN. I THINK THE BOARD IS CONFIDENT THAT ALL RELEVANT ACTORS, IANA, ROOT SERVER OPERATORS, ET CETERA, ARE SUFFICIENTLY INFORMED ABOUT WHAT IS EXPECTED FROM THEM IN TERMS OF WORKLOADING AND RESOURCES IN ORDER TO FULFILL THEIR RESPECTIVE ROLES. IN PARTICULAR, THE PREDELEGATION (DROPPED AUDIO) OF ROOT ZONE CHANGES PER YEAR AND ALSO EXPECTED POST DELEGATIONS IF YOU HAVE AN INTRODUCTION OF A COUPLE HUNDRED ENTRIES OF NEW gTLDs, YOU, OF COURSE, HAVE THE MAINTENANCE AFTER IT WHICH HAS CHANGES TO PERFORM. I THINK I WILL LEAVE IT WITH THIS. SUZANNE. I AM VERY CURIOUS FOR YOUR.... >>SUZANNE WOOLF: THANK YOU. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KEEP IT VERY BRIEF BECAUSE WE'RE HERE TO LISTEN TO OUR COLLEAGUES HERE. AND MAKE SURE WE DO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE ARE. BUT JUST AS YOU SAID, THERE'S QUITE PROPERLY A SET OF CONCERNS BOTH AROUND THE OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT AND MAKING SURE THAT ALL THE ISSUES HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AS FAR AS THE IMPLICATIONS ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE SYSTEM. OF AN EXPANSION IN THE SIZE OF THE ROOT ZONE. BUT IN ADDITION, AS ALMOST A SEPARATE CONCERN, WHAT I'M HEARING FROM THE SCORECARD AND OUR CONVERSATIONS TOGETHER HERE IS THAT THERE IS ALSO AN ALMOST SEPARATE NEED FOR FURTHER TRANSPARENCY AND FOR SOME OF THAT ASSURANCE TO BE PUSHED OUTWARDS. AND THE CRE CREATING ASSURANCE AND CONFIDENCE THAT THE HOMEWORK HAS BEEN DONE ON OPERATIONAL MATTERS IS REALLY AS MUCH WHAT WE ARE HERE TO ADDRESS AS THE UNDERLYING OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS. WE COULD GO ON AT GREAT LENGTH ABOUT WHERE THE OPERATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED TO DATE. WE'RE HERE TO IDENTIFY ANY REMAINING GAPS. THERE'S BEEN A GREAT DEAL OF WORK THAT HAS GONE INTO IDENTIFYING THE OPERATIONAL ISSUES AND ASSURING THAT THEY WILL BE HANDLED. THE ROOT SCALING STUDY THAT THE RAKS AND SSAC SPONSORED, FORMAL REQUEST FOR ADVICE FROM THE RSSAC AND SSAC, AND RELATED OPERATIONAL DISCUSSIONS. AND IN FACT A GREAT DEAL OF WORK HAS BEEN DONE THAT NOW NEEDS, AS WE SAID, TO BE PUSHED OUTWARD TO TURN INTO CONFIDENCE AND ASSURANCE. AND AS THOMAS REFERRED TO, SOME ONGOING ABILITY TO KEEP A DIALOGUE, TO KEEP REPORTING AND MONITORING DONE OPENLY SO THAT NOT ONLY ARE THE ISSUES UNDER CONTROL BUT THAT EVERYBODY CAN SEE THAT THEY ARE. AND SO WHAT I WOULD MOST LIKE TO HEAR IS WHETHER, FIRST OF ALL, THAT'S A SHARED UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE WE ARE AMONGST THE BOARD AND THE GAC, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE OF A SIMILAR MIND SO THAT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND ADDRESS ANY REMAINING DETAILS. MY OWN IMPRESSION IS THAT WE ARE NOT FAR APART AS FAR AS LARGE-SCALE ISSUES OF POLICY. PERHAPS UNLIKE SOME OF THE ISSUES WE'RE HERE TO DEAL WITH. SO FOR THE MOST PART, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS CONFIDENCE BUILDING, ASSURANCES THAT THE DETAILS HAVE BEEN LOOKED AFTER. IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES OF DIALOGUE AND SO ON. AND IF THAT'S THE SHARED UNDERSTANDING, WE SHOULD GO FORWARD WITH THAT, AND IF IT'S NOT, WE NEED TO IDENTIFY THAT. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: LOOKING FOR OTHER COMMENT FROM BOARD OR GAC MEMBERS OR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >>SWEDEN: SWEDEN THANK YOU VERY MUCH, HEATHER AND PETER. MARIA FROM SWEDEN, GAC MEMBER. JUST TO SAY I THINK WE ARE NOT VERY FAR APART SO I CAN AGREE ON THAT ONE BUT I THINK ALSO TO WHAT THOMAS DE HAAN SAID, HE READ FROM THE SCORECARD I THINK A VERY IMPORTANT STEP ACTUALLY IS THE EVALUATION STEP. KIND OF HAVE SOME KIND OF, AFTER A FIRST ROUND, YOU MAKE SOME KIND OF EVALUATION. AND BASED ON THAT ONE, ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW HOW TO PROCEED. SO THAT KIND OF STEP IN THE PROCESS I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT. AND EVEN FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, I THINK I TOLD YOU BEFORE IN SOME OF THE OTHER MEETINGS WE HAD WITH YOU, ACTUALLY, I THINK IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT THAT YOU HAVE SOME KIND OF LIMITED FIRST ROUND SO YOU COULD ACTUALLY HAVE THIS BATCH. AND THEN YOU EVALUATE. AND THEN KIND OF BASED ON THAT INFORMATION YOU GET, YOU CAN MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: SUZANNE, IF I COULD JUST ASK A HIGH-LEVEL QUESTION, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THIS ON THE BOARD QUITE FROM EARLY DAYS. AND PERHAPS JUST BEFORE I -- THOMAS, JUST TO CONFIRM HOW IMPORTANT THIS TOPIC IS TO US AS WELL. I THINK I'M JUST LOOKING AT LINE ONE OF THE MISSION OF ICANN WHICH WE ARE ALL HERE TO SUPPORT, WHICH IS ENSURE THE STABLE AND SECURE OPERATION. I MEAN, THAT'S POINT ONE OF JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING THAT WE DO. SO WE SHARE WITH YOU THE SENSE OF THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS AS A TOPIC. SUZANNE, I SUPPOSE THE QUESTION -- BECAUSE THE NONTECHNICAL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, LIKE ME, ALSO APPROACH THIS ON THE BASIS THAT THE ROOT SYSTEM WAS KIND OF LIKE A BOILER AND THAT YOU COULD STICK A THERMOMETER OR HAVE A VALVE THAT WAS READING OPERATING CALMLY, OPERATING, YOU KNOW, DANGEROUSLY. AND I THINK TECHNICAL PEOPLE LIKE YOU PUT ME IN MY PLACE VERY EARLY ON AND TOLD ME THAT'S NOT HOW IT OPERATES. SO COULD YOU COMMENT REALLY ON THE CONCEPT OF A MONITORING AND ALERTING SYSTEM, AS A CONCEPT. >>SUZANNE WOOLF: SURE. AND THEN, ACTUALLY, I SUSPECT THAT MY SSAC COLLEAGUES HERE, HAVING DONE THE DEEP DIVE WITH ME ON SOME OF THESE TOPICS, MIGHT ALSO HAVE SOME SUPPLEMENTARY COMMENTS BUT I WILL GET US STARTED. THERE IS A -- ONE OF THE FACTORS WE IDENTIFIED EARLY IN THE NORMAL ATTEMPT TO REVIEW ALL THESE THINGS IS THAT AS A DNS OPERATION, AS THE TECHNICAL OPERATION OF A DNS ZONE, THE ROOT IS NOT COMPLICATED. IT IS NOT LARGE. IT IS NOT COMPLICATED IN TERMS OF THE KIND OF DATA IT CARRIES. WHAT IS VERY IMPORTANT, THOUGH, BECAUSE THE CRITICAL PARAMETER IS STABILITY, IS LIMITING RATE OF CHANGE, MORE IMPORTANTLY THAN LIMITING MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE. AND THIS IS PRETTY EXTENSIVELY DOCUMENTED WHERE THIS THOUGHT COMES FROM, AND SOME OF THE PRIMARY MATERIALS I REFERRED TO EARLIER. SO WHAT WE LOOK FOR -- WHAT I WOULD EXPECT WE WOULD THINK OF IN TERMS OF MONITORING AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF MONITORING IS, FIRST OF ALL, BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS SO PUBLIC, THERE'S A GREAT DEAL OF PUBLIC INFORMATION THAT CAN BE USED FROM ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED TO REFER TO HOW CERTAIN -- HOW THE SYSTEM IS RESPONDING. BUT IN ADDITION, FOR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS, WHAT YOU LOOK AT IS A FEW RELATIVELY SIMPLE THINGS THAT YOU WANT TO LOOK AT OVER A LONG TERM FOR CHANGES IN BEHAVIOR. AND AS WE GET FURTHER INTO SPECIFYING DETAILS, YOU KNOW, THINGS WILL BE CLEARLY AND PRECISELY DEFINED. BUT THE HIGH-LEVEL TAKE-AWAY HAS TO DO WITH RATE OF CHANGE AND THE ABILITY TO DO TREND ANALYSIS AND LONG TERM REVIEW AS WELL AS INSTANTANEOUS DATA. AND I BELIEVE STEVE HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS, MAYBE. >>STEVE CROCKER: THANK YOU, SUZANNE. YES, ALONG WITH SUZANNE, SHE AND I AND SEVERAL OTHERS HAVE SPENT QUITE A BIT OF TIME ON THIS OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. WHEN THE QUESTION ABOUT ROOT SCALING FIRST AROSE, THERE WAS NO BOUND ON ON HOW BIG THE ROOT NIGHT GROW UNDER THE PRESSURES THAT WERE BEING ANTICIPATED. AND NUMBERS WERE BEING THROWN AROUND THAT WENT INTO THE MILLIONS, INTO THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS, AND WERE REALLY QUITE EXTRAVAGANT. WHAT'S BECOME VERY EVIDENT AND VERY SOLID IS THAT THE MAXIMUM RATE OF CHANGE THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEE IS VERY, VERY SMALL NUMBERS. ON THE ORDER OF A THOUSAND OR 2,000 OR WHATEVER, YOU FIGURE IN THAT RANGE YOU WANT TO CHOOSE, PER YEAR. AND AS SUZANNE SAID, THE ROOT IS A VERY, VERY SMALL OPERATION. THAT IF YOU LOOK AT THE ROOT IN CONTRAST TO ALL OF THE TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN OPERATIONS, THE BIGGEST TOP-LEVEL DOMAIN OPERATION, OF COURSE, IS COM WHICH HAS ON THE ORDER OF A HUNDRED MILLION SEPARATE ENTRIES, AND THE ROOT HAS ON THE ORDER OF 300. THAT'S A HUGE, HUGE, ALMOST FIVE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE -- MORE THAN FIVE ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE DIFFERENCE, PUSHING TOWARDS SIX ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE. THAT IS A FACTOR OF A MILLION, ALMOST, DIMPGS. AND THEN ALL OF THE ROOT OPERATORS -- I MEAN, ALL OF THE TLD OPERATIONS RANGE UP AND DOWN WITHIN THAT. BUT, FOR EXAMPLE, IN YOUR COUNTRY, DOT NL HAS A MILLION PLUS A FEW MILLION, I THINK, NOW ENTRIES. SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S FUNDAMENTALLY A VERY TINY OPERATION. AND EVEN UNDER THE MOST EXTREME HYPOTHESES NOW ON THE TABLE, THE MAXIMUM CHANGE STILL PUTS IT IN THE TINY, TINY RANGE. SO IF I COULD DRAW A KIND OF LOOSE ANALOGY, TAKE ONE OF THESE CUPS OR BOTTLES OF WATER SITTING AROUND HERE, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A SYSTEM THAT IS CAPABLE OF CARRYING A LITER OF WATER THAT IS CURRENTLY CARRYING A DROP. AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT EXPANDING IT TO TEN DROPS OR A THOUSAND DROPS AND IT'S STILL A VERY SMALL AMOUNT IN A VERY SMALL CONTAINER COMPARED TO THE MASSIVE SYSTEMS THAT WE KNOW HOW TO BUILD THAT ARE CAPABLE OF HOLDING RESERVOIRS FILL. SO THE MAGNITUDES ARE VASTLY DIFFERENT. ANOTHER POINT SUZANNE ALLUDED TO THAT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE, THERE IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT'S DONE. THE ROOT OPERATORS ARE VERY CAPABLE, EXPERIENCED PEOPLE. THEY HAVE ALL KINDS OF METERS AND GAUGES ON THEIR BOILERS, IF YOU WILL. THE PRINCIPAL HIGH-SPEED PART OF THE OPERATION IS THE PART THAT FACES THE INTERNET USERS AND IS RESPONDING TO QUERIES FROM USERS. AND THOSE ARE MEASURED IN MILLIONS TO BILLIONS PER DAY. THERE IS NO ANTICIPATED CHANGE DUE TO THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. THE PRINCIPAL THING THAT CAUSES A SHARP RISE IN THE NUMBER OF QUERIES TO ROOT SYSTEMS ARE THE NUMBER OF USERS ON THE INTERNET, NOT THE NUMBER OF DOMAINS. THE BACK SIDE OF THOSE SYSTEMS WHERE YOU'RE PUTTING NEW NAMES INTO THE SYSTEMS IS CHANGING AT A VERY SLOW RATE. A SIMPLE RULE OF THUMB IS THAT THERE IS APPROXIMATELY ONE CHANGE PER DAY PER TLD, AND THAT INCLUDES THE WHOIS CHANGES AS WELL AS THE OTHER THINGS. SO THESE ARE TINY NUMBERS. AND THESE CHANGES TAKE A FAIRLY LONG TIME TO PROPAGATE THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES. SO THE ROOT OPERATORS SITTING AT THE FAR END OF THIS CHANGE ARE ABLE TO SEE THESE CHANGES COMING A LONG, LONG TIME IN ADVANCE. SO THIS IMAGE OF A BOILER PERHAPS THAT IS ABOUT TO EXPLODE AS IT GETS TOO HIGH, THIS IS MORE LIKE WATCHING THE GRASS GROW AND WORRYING IF THE GRASS IS GOING TO GET TOO HIGH AND WONDERING WHETHER OR NOT YOU WILL BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO IT IN TIME. COME BY ONCE A YEAR AND CHECK IT OUT. IT WILL BE FINE. I THINK THE OTHER POINT THAT SUZANNE PRESSED IS QUITE RELEVANT. THERE IS A LOT MORE INFORMATION THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RUNNING THESE SYSTEMS ACTUALLY KNOW, AND THEY ACTUALLY DO COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER. WHAT IS LESS CLEAR TO MOST OF US IN THE ROOM HERE AND TO THE THE PEOPLE WE TALKED TO AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT COMMUNICATION IS TAKING PLACE, WHETHER OR NOT THAT DOCUMENTATION IS AVAILABLE. AND I THINK A RELATIVELY EASY AND QUITE APPROPRIATE THING WOULD BE TO HAVE MORE FORMAL COMMUNICATION RELATED TO THAT. I WOULD CERTAINLY BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT, AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL. AND I WOULD ALSO INVITE THE NONTECHNICAL PEOPLE TO REQUEST, EVEN DEMAND A SIMPLE TUTORIAL ONCE A YEAR, OR LITTLE BRIEFING, THAT MAKES THEM FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE, AND APPROPRIATELY SO, IN TERMS THAT ARE UNDERSTANDABLE. AND I THINK THAT WOULD BE A VERY HELPFUL THING TO DO. AND THEN PUTTING MY BOARD MEMBER HAT ON, I THINK WE COULD COMMIT TO THAT IN A HEARTBEAT. >>THOMAS DE HAAN: WELL, THANK YOU, BOTH. APPARENTLY, I THINK I AGREE -- OR WE AGREE WITH THE FACT THAT TRANSPARENCY HELPS ENORMOUSLY, ESPECIALLY IF WE COME FROM GOVERNMENTS AND OUR MINISTER WANTS TO HAVE ALL THE THINGS YOU SAID, LET'S SAY, IN TEN SENTENCES. SO IT'S A TASK FOR US TO GIVE THEM THE CONFIDENCE FEELING THAT WE EXPERIENCE FROM YOU NOW. SO TRANSPARENCY AND MORE FORMALIZATION, I AGREE. HOWEVER, I THINK WE DID NOT HAVE REACTIONS, WHICH WE THINK IS QUITE IMPORTANT, TO THE SENSE OF -- TO ADVICES THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, ICANN COMMITS TO NOT START THE SECOND ROUND UNLESS YOU HAVE INNOVATION. AND THE SECOND POINT, AND I THINK MARK SAID THIS ALSO, WE JOINTLY SET UP THIS SCORECARD POINT , THE PARTS THAT WHOLE CONSEQUENCES OF POTENTIALLY, HYPOTHETICALLY, YOU HAVE TO SLOW DOWN THE PROCESS SHOULD BE AT LEAST INTEGRATED SOMEHOW IN THE DECK SO THAT APPLICANTS ARE AWARE OF POTENTIAL RISKS. THANK YOU. >>STEVE CROCKER: LET ME TAKE PRIVILEGE OF RESPONDING TO THE POINTS THAT YOU ARE RAISING THERE. I WOULD ARGUE THAT THE EVALUATION SHOULD BE A CONTINUOUS PROCESS, NOT JUST PUT OFF FOR SOME TIME AND THEN DONE AT THE END OF THIS. THAT THERE SHOULD BE A PRETTY CLEAR PICTURE. AND I WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO A FORMAL ADDITIONAL EVALUATION OR TAKING THE MEASURE OF THE SYSTEM SO THAT EVERYBODY IS COMFORTABLE WITH IT, BUT ALL THE DATA RELEVANT TO THAT OUGHT TO BE AVAILABLE ON PRETTY MUCH A CONTINUOUS BASIS THROUGHOUT THIS ENTIRE PROCESS. IT'S MUCH EASIER TO DO THAT THAN IT IS TO SAY, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO STOP THE WORLD. WE'RE GOING TO DO AN EVALUATION AND JUST HAVE A SINGLE POINT IN TIME. AND YOU HAVE MUCH MORE CONFIDENCE IF YOU HAVE A SYSTEM THAT IS UNDER MEASUREMENT AND IS CONTINUOUSLY REPORTED AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE IT IS. SO I WOULD GO -- I'M NOT SUGGESTING NOT DOING -- PARDON ME FOR THE DOUBLE NEGATIVE. IT'S PERFECTLY OKAY TO DO THE EVALUATION AT THE END BUT I WOULD TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER AND DO A CONTINUOUS EVALUATION. THE OTHER ASPECT IS IN TERMS OF PUTTING THINGS INTO THE DAG, THE RELEVANCE THERE, I THINK, IS YOUR VERY WELL TAKEN POINT OF KEEPING APPLICANTS INFORMED. BUT THAT IS ONLY A PART OF THE PICTURE. THE OTHER PART OF THE PICTURE IS, IS THE ROOT SYSTEM HEALTHY AND STABLE AND SO FORTH. AND THAT'S NOT OF INTEREST ONLY TO APPLICANTS. THAT'S OF INTEREST TO THE ENTIRE INTERNET COMMUNITY. AND THE PROPER PLACE FOR REPORTING THAT IS IN A MUCH BROADER FORUM. SO I THINK THE CONNECTION BETWEEN REPORTING ON ROOT SERVER SYSTEM STABILITY AND ITS PERFORMANCE UNDER CHANGES DUE TO SCALE IS A SEPARATE TOPIC, AND IT APPLIES BACK TO THE TLD PROCESS TO THE EXTENT EXACTLY THAT YOU HAVE SUGGESTED OF KEEPING THE APPLICANTS INFORMED. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH REALLY THERE IS TO INFORM BECAUSE THE PROCESS IS SO LONG, AND IT'S VERY HARD TO TEM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROCESS GOING FORWARD AND THE PROCESS STOPPED AT ANY GIVEN INSTANT. I MEAN, IT'S A PRETTY SLOW MOVING TREADMILL, IF YOU WILL, NOT A HIGH-SPEED TRAIN THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN COMES TO AN ABRUPT HALT. BUT I THINK IT'S RELATIVELY EASY TO REPORT ON WHAT THE Q LINKS ARE AND HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR AN APPLICATION TO GO THROUGH AND WHETHER THERE ARE ANY CHANGES DUE TO EXTERNAL CIRCUMSTANCES SUCH AS A BIG CHANGE IN THE ROOT SERVER SYSTEM. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: STEVE, WE ARE STARTING TO GET INTO SOLUTIONS, ET CETERA, WHICH MAY MEAN WE DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS TOMORROW SO THAT MAY BE QUITE USEFUL. WE SOUND LIKE WE MAY BE VERY CLOSE. TO SUMMARIZE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, YOU ARE SAYING THE REPORTING SYSTEMS ARE ALREADY THERE AND A LOT OF PEOPLE ALREADY HAVE THIS INFORMATION. PERHAPS WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, AND THIS IS THOMAS'S POINT ABOUT TRANSPARENCY AND ACCESSIBILITY, AND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO GO AND INVENT NEW MONITORING SYSTEMS TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. WE NEED TO MAKE BETTER USE OF THE SYSTEMS THAT ARE ALREADY THERE. IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? >>STEVE CROCKER: FUNDAMENTALLY THAT IS RIGHT. AND PACKAGING THE INFORMATION THAT EXISTS TO ADDRESS THIS COMMUNITY RATHER THAN THE OPERATIONAL COMMUNITY THAT WATCHES THIS VERY CLOSELY BY THEMSELVES. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: RAM, YOU WANTED TO ADD TO THIS AS WELL. >>RAM MOHAN: THANKS. JUST A QUESTION. IN THE RECOMMENDED GAC ADVICE, THERE IS A SENTENCE HERE, THOMAS, THAT SAYS THE PROCESSES AND POSSIBLE RESULTING RESTORATIVE MEASURES THAT FLOW FROM THE RESULTS. SO THIS IS TALKING ABOUT THE MONITORING AND ALERTING SYSTEM. AND THE RECOMMENDATION OR THE ADVICE IS THAT THE PROCESSES AND THE POSSIBLE RESULTING RESTORATIVE MEASURES SHOULD BE FULLY DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICANT GUIDEBOOK BEFORE THE START OF THE FIRST APPLICATION ROUND. I'M CURIOUS TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THE THINKING BEHIND THAT, BECAUSE SOME OF WHAT -- WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MEASUREMENT OF THE ROOT SYSTEM AND HOW THAT PROCESS FLOWS, THAT TENDS TO BE SOMEWHAT -- FIRST OF ALL, AS STEVE AND SUZANNE HAD MENTIONED, THERE ARE MANY MEASURES ALREADY IN PLACE, MOST OF WHICH ARE PUBLIC RIGHT NOW. AND SECONDLY, SOME OF THE -- AS CHANGE HAPPENS, WHEN THERE IS A DYNAMIC EVENT AND AS CHANGE HAPPENS, WHAT YOU MEASURE CURRENTLY OFTEN ENDS UP -- MAY SOMETIMES GIVE YOU A CLUE AS TO WHAT ELSE MAY NEED TO BE MEASURED. SO I AM WONDERING WHAT IS THE INTENT BEHIND THE GAC ADVICE, THAT ALL THE POSSIBLE -- IT FEELS LIKE YOU ARE ASKING FOR ALL THE POSSIBLE PROCESSES AND POSSIBLE RESULTING MEASURES BE DEFINED AHEAD OF KNOWING WHAT THE PROBLEMS ITSELF MIGHT BE. AND I'M JUST CURIOUS TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. >>THOMAS DE HAAN: I THINK BASICALLY OUR ADVICE ALSO, AND THE WORDING, COMES OUT OF THE FACT THAT IT'S STILL VERY UN- -- NOT SURE WHAT WILL BE THE EFFECTS. AGAIN, TRANSPARENCY WORKS. IF WE TALK ABOUT RESTORATIVE MEASURES, THEN WE JUST -- IF WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT CAN HAPPEN AND HOW YOU CAN SHUT DOWN, WE HAVE OF COURSE THE REFLEX OF TRYING TO SECURE IT IN WORDING, WHICH FROM THINGS WE KNOW. SO I THINK I AGREE WITH YOU. WE DON'T KNOW YET WHAT KIND OF EFFECT YOU CAN EXPECT AND WHAT KIND OF SOLUTION YOU CAN HAVE. SO IT'S HYPOTHETICAL. AND I THINK THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ADVICE SHOULD, OF COURSE, BE TAILORED TO WHAT THE SYSTEM CAN DELIVER AND WHAT CAN -- LET'S SAY WHAT KIND OF EFFECT YOU CAN TAKE INTO THE APPLICANT'S PROCESS. I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE MADE IT CLEAR, BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE MARK CAN ADD TO THIS POINT, OR.... >>HEATHER DRYDEN: THANK YOU, THOMAS. IF I MAY. I THINK ONE WAY OF LOOKING AT THIS SET OF ISSUES FROM A GOVERNMENT PERSPECTIVE IS THAT OUR LEADERSHIP IS SEEKING ASSURANCES THAT EVERYTHING IS BEING CONDUCTED IN AN ORDERLY, THOUGHTFUL MANNER; THAT THE APPROPRIATE MECHANISMS ARE PUT IN PLACE, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. AND WE NOTED VERY EARLY ON THAT AT A HIGH LEVEL WE ARE REALLY CLOSE TO AGREEING, BUT WE SHOULDN'T FORGET THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING SOME SORT OF RECORD OR DOCUMENTATION OR SOMETHING THAT MEMBERS OF THE GAC CAN ACTUALLY POINT TO AND DEMONSTRATE THAT ICANN IS DOING ALL THAT IT NEEDS TO DO. THESE ARE ITS PLANS. AND SO WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGES TO THE DAG OR SOME OTHER WRITTEN PLAN, YOU KNOW, THERE IS THAT NEED. AND SO THAT MIGHT HELP EXPLAIN THE NATURE OF THE REQUEST MADE. THAT'S WHAT WE ARE AT LEAST IN PART SEEKING. >>RAM MOHAN: HEATHER, THANK YOU. THAT IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL BECAUSE THAT HELPS CLARIFY WHERE POTENTIALLY WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO GO. BECAUSE I WAS CONCERNED, WHEN I READ IT, I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE DESIRE TO -- OR WHAT SEEMED LIKE A DESIRE TO DOCUMENT WHAT WE DON'T KNOW AND HOW WE ARE GOING TO SOLVE A PROBLEM WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT. THANK YOU. >>HEATHER DRYDEN: THANK YOU, RAM. I HAVE THE UK AND SWEDEN ASKING FOR THE FLOOR. >>UNITED KINGDOM: YES, THANKS VERY MUCH, CO-CHAIR. THE POINT OF -- ONE POINT OF ANXIETY IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS -- IF THE MONITORING THROWS UP SOME PROBLEM, WHAT, THEN, IS THE PROCESS? I MEAN, WHO TAKES THE DECISION TO APPLY THE BRAKES OR HOW TO COMMUNICATE THOSE APPLICANTS THAT ARE SORT OF WAITING IN LINE WANTING TO KNOW WHAT THE IMPACT IS GOING TO BE. AND PART OF THE ANXIETY IS THAT THERE'S OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF ACTORS INVOLVED IN THIS PROCESS OF DELEGATION AND OPERATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION. SO, YOU KNOW, HOW -- WHEN WE TURN TO A MINISTER AND SAY I DON'T KNOW WHO ACTUALLY HAS THE FINAL DECISION ON THIS. IT'S A BIT AWKWARD. SO CLARITY ON THAT IS IMPORTANT. IT'S IMPORTANT TO US IN ANSWERING QUESTIONS FROM COLLEAGUES IN GOVERNMENT, AND ALSO, IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COMMUNITY OF REGISTRIES TO KNOW WHAT IS THE PROCESS, HOW PREDICTABLE IS THIS AND WHO DO WE TALK TO. IS IT THE ROOT SERVER OPERATOR? IS IT NTIA? IS IT VERISIGN? IANA? ICANN? WHO IS IN CONTROL, IF YOU LIKE, IN SUCH A CRITICAL SITUATIONTALKING ABOUT EXTERNAL ACTORS, THAT WAS ONE OF THE IMPORTANT POINTS THAT CAME UP IN NATIONAL CONSULTATIONS ON THIS. IT DOES INVOLVE A LOT OF ACTORS, AND SOMETIMES SOME OF THE ANALYSIS LEAVES YOU A BIT GUESSING. AND THE DELEGATION RATES SCENARIO PAPER, FOR EXAMPLE, ASSUMES THAT THERE ARE NO CAPACITY LIMITATIONS. IT IS ON THE FOURTH PAGE. THE MODEL ASSUMES NO LIMITATIONS ON IANA'S, VERISIGN'S OR NTIA'S ABILITY TO EXECUTE DELEGATION ACTIVITIES. THAT'S A BIG -- THAT'S A BIG GAP, IF YOU'D LIKE, IN THE ANALYSIS. SO IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET A COMPLETE PICTURE. AND IN TERMS OF THE DAG FOR THAT COMPLETE PICTURE TO BE FULLY ARTICULATED AS REGARDS ALL THE ACTORS. IN TERMS OF -- WE'VE TOUCHED ON THE IDEA OF LIMITING THE FIRST BATCH. I DON'T THINK WE'RE THERE YET IN TERMS OF WHAT THAT LIMIT MIGHT BE. WE'VE HEARD FROM THE ICANN TEAM 200 TO 300 IN THE FIRST BATCH. HOW IS THAT FIGURE ARRIVED AT? I DON'T THINK I CAN EXPLAIN THAT TO A MINISTER. BUT THAT'S -- THAT WOULD BE A DOUBLING OF THE ROOT. IS THAT SAFE? THAT'S THE KIND OF QUESTION YOU HAVE TO ANSWER TO A MINISTER ON. AND IT IS DIFFICULT FOR US TO BE PRECISE ABOUT THAT. AND WE ALWAYS TEND IN GOVERNMENT TO ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION. IS A DOUBLING OF THE ROOT WON'T GO IN THE FIRST BATCH A SAFE OPTION? THANKS. >>HEATHER DRYDEN: THANK YOU, U.K. I HAVE SWEDEN AND ITALY BUT I KNOW YOU HAVE A SPEAKING ORDER AS WELL, PETER. SO SHALL WE GO? OKAY, SWEDEN, PLEASE. >>SWEDEN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH, HEATHER. TO START WITH, I JUST WANT TO COMMENT ON RAM'S QUESTION ABOUT THE FORMULATION ABOUT THE RESTORATIVE MEASURES. OF COURSE -- OF COURSE, IT'S HARD TO DESCRIBE MEASURES BEFORE THEY ARE DONE OR BEFORE YOU KNOW THE RESULTS IN THE APPLICANT GUIDEBOOK. SO THAT'S CERTAINLY NOT MEANT TO BE HERE. BUT IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT IT'S DESCRIBED ACTUALLY HOW YOU TAKE CARE OF THE MEASUREMENTS, THE INFORMATION FROM THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION THAT YOU'RE DOING. SO THAT IS ACTUALLY WHAT'S MEANT TO BE HERE SO FAR AS I CAN SEE. BUT WHAT STEVE SAID ABOUT THE EVALUATION HAS TO BE AN ONGOING TASK, AND I THINK THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT, OF COURSE, THAT YOU HAVE THIS MONITORING AND DOING THE EVALUATION ON THE GO. BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN ACTUALLY THAT IT HAS TO EXCLUDE TO HAVE A LIMITED FIRST ROUND. AND THEN BEFORE YOU START WITH THE SECOND BATCH, YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE INFORMATION THAT YOU GET FROM THE EVALUATION BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T HAVE THIS LIMITED FIRST ROUND, THEN I'M COMING BACK TO WHAT MARK WAS SAYING, HOW IS THE PROCESS GOING TO BE? EVEN THOUGH IT IS A SLOW PROCESS, EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT A RUNNING HORSE OR WHATEVER STEVE WAS SAYING, IT STILL NEEDS TO COME SOME KIND OF PROCESS AND SOME KIND OF TOOLS TO ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO STOP. SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE SOME KIND OF FIRST ROUND AND THEN BASED ON THAT INFORMATION YOU KNOW HOW TO MOVE FORWARD AS I SAID BEFORE. THANK YOU. >>HEATHER DRYDEN: THANK YOU, SWEDEN. ITALY? >>ITALY: OKAY. THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WOULD LIKE IF THE BOARD STAFF CAN ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THIS EVALUATION, THE DELEGATION RATE SCENARIO SAYING THAT EXPECT DELEGATION RATES WERE 200, 215 TO 240 PER AREA. BUT MAYBE IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN IDEA OF REALISTIC EVALUATION OF THE POTENTIALITY OF ACTIVATING THIS NEW gTLD. SO WHAT I MEAN IS EXPECTATION ON HOW MANY APPLICATIONS WILL BE -- WILL ARRIVE AND THEN, OF COURSE, THERE IS A TIME SPENT FOR EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATIONS, NEGOTIATING CONTRACTS AND THEN AFTER SIGNATURE CONTRACTS, ACTIVATION OF THE NEW REGISTRIES. AND THEN IT IS IMPORTANT TO FIGURE OUT REALISTICALLY IN QUARTERS, IN THE NEXT YEAR AFTER THE CALL, HOW MANY NEW REGISTRIES WILL BE ACTIVATED BECAUSE IN THE END, IT MAY BE THE REALISTIC DATA IS LOWER THAN INDICATED HERE. SO THE -- I MEAN, THE ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS ARE LIMITING FACTOR, OF COURSE, ON THE NUMBER. AND I HAPPILY CAN BELIEVE THAT ICANN WILL BE ABLE TO SIGN ONE CONTRACT PER WORKING DAY IN ONE YEAR, AT LEAST IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, BECAUSE IT MAY BE THERE IS TIME THEN TO ADJUST THE EVALUATION AND THE CONTRACTUAL MATTERS IN THE FUTURE -- IN THE FUTURE CAUSE IN THE SECOND ROUND. AND, OF COURSE, IT IS IMPORTANT TO DO AN EVALUATION OF HOW MUCH TIME WILL BE NEEDED TO END UP WITH SATISFYING THE FIRST CALL AND THEN THE COMMUNITY WANTS TO KNOW THE SECOND CALL WILL BE MADE. SO I WONDER IF THIS PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS ARE LOWER BID OR SIGNIFICANTLY CONNECTED TO THE ROOT SOON INCREASE. OKAY. IF YOU CAN GIVE SOME MORE SPECIFIC IDEAS ON THAT, IT WOULD BE INTERESTING FOR THE DISCUSSION. >>PETER DENGATE THRUSH: THANKS, STEFANO. I SUGGEST WE ANSWER HOLD THAT AND GETTING INTO A DEBATE ABOUT BOARD PAPERS. THE KEY THING FOR US TODAY IS TO UNDERSTAND THE GAC CONCERNS. WE WILL COME BACK AND ANSWER THAT IF WE HAVE THE FURTHER DISCUSSION. WAS THERE ANOTHER GAC SPEAKER? BECAUSE I'VE GOT SUZANNE WANTING TO COME BACK AND BRUCE WANTING TO SAY SOMETHING. >>SUZANNE WOOLF: SURE. JUST AS A VERY BRIEF NOTE, TO THE EXTENT WE HAVE IDENTIFIED A NEED TO TALK TO EACH OTHER MORE ABOUT SOME OF THE OPERATIONAL ISSUES INVOLVING THE OUTSIDE -- THE ROOT SERVER OPERATORS AND RELATED OUTSIDE ACTORS, I WOULD INVITE US ALL TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY THAT RSSAC WILL BE DOING A WORKSHOP AND COMMITTEE MEETING AND MORE MEMBERS THAN FRANKLY THAN ARE AT AT ICANN MEETINGS AS FRANKLY A FAIRLY BASIC SHIFT IN HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT THE RELATIONSHIPS -- RELATIONSHIPS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. MORE OF US IN A WORKSHOP AND SO ON IN SAN FRANCISCO AND OTHER FUTURE MEETINGS ONGOING. AND IF WE SHOULD -- I THINK FROM WHAT I'M HEARING, WE SHOULD BE EXPLORING SOME ONGOING OR REOCCURRING WAY TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS. AND JUST AS YOU SAY TRANSPARENCY WORKS. >>BRUCE TONKIN: THANK YOU, PETER. I WANTED TO VERY BRIEFLY COMMENT ON SOME OF THE TERMINOLOGY USED AND PERHAPS PROVIDE SOME CLARITY ON THIS. FIRST, WHEN PEOPLE USE THE TERM "ROUNDS," ROUNDS IN A NEW gTLD CONTEXT, THIS WOULD BE THE THIRD ROUND. THE FIRST ROUND WAS IN 2000. SECOND ROUND WAS IN 2004. WE'RE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY THE THIRD ROUND THIS YEAR. IN TERMS OF THE ADMINISTRATION OR PROCESS OF APPLICATIONS, THE TERMINOLOGY THERE IS "BATCHES." SO IF THERE IS ONLY, SAY, 200 APPLICATIONS THAT WOULD ESSENTIALLY FIT WITHIN ONE BATCH. WHAT THE STAFF DOCUMENT HAS STATED IN TERMS OF THE PROCESSING IS THAT IF THEY GOT 2,000, THEN THEY BREAK THAT UP INTO BATCHES OF 1,000. SO PROBABLY JUST SEPARATE TERMINOLOGY FROM "ROUNDS" AND BATCHES ." IT IS REALLY THE ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY OF ICANN TO HANDLE [Beginning and end of session missing due to connectivity problems -- KM]