ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
TopicSummary of Current DeliberationsAnticipated OutcomeType of Change Anticipated (e.g.,Policy Recommendation, Implementation Guidance, etc.)Status (e.g., pending, draft recommendations, consensus recommendation, etc.)
2
Cancelling Subsequent Procedures-- Existing New gTLD policy states the new gTLD application process should be an ongoing mechanism to accept applications for new gTLDs.
-- The WG has not agreed upon a set of arguments or data points that would suggest that the existing policy should be overwritten to cease the provision of new gTLDs in the future.
-- There is at a minimum, anecdotal evidence of demand for additional new gTLDs, although data-driven evidence is being sought and may be provided by the CCT-RT.
-- The WG welcomes analysis on the effects of the New gTLD Program on competition, diversity, innovation, trust, etc. which may provided by the CCT-RT.
-- The WG has not identified any facts and/or circumstances that require a change to this policy.
-- The WG has noted that the elimination of an ongoing mechanism may have an anti-competitive effect for potential applicants.
-- While there is general agreement that additional gTLDs have enhanced diversity, there is some desire (particularly from the GAC) to develop a framework, or at least a definition, of what “diversity” means in the context of New gTLDs in order to determine whether “diversity” has in fact been enhanced.
-- The WG agrees that it is too early to get a complete understanding of the benefits and/or negative effects from the 2012 round, though there is no compelling reason to alter the existing policy (i.e., a continuing mechanism for new gTLDs).
-- There appears to be general agreement that there should be additional new gTLDs in the future
-- No changes anticipated to existing policy for an ongoing mechanism from the 2007 policy recommendations, although may want to provide guidance for future reviews

Policy Recommendation: While it may be too early to evaluate the full range of benefits and challenges at this stage, the WG may want to consider recommending and providing guidance on future reviews and perhaps data and metrics that should be collected for future analysis.Preliminary agreement - language needed for recommendation
3
Predictability See Draft Findings and recommendations: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Sd6mpO5MqHl7BHOl9HBENDgUvcqQ04QumbVNfVu-FM/edit
4
Community EngagementSee Draft Findings and recommendations: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Sd6mpO5MqHl7BHOl9HBENDgUvcqQ04QumbVNfVu-FM/edit
5
Applications Assessed in RoundsSee Draft Findings and recommendations: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16Sd6mpO5MqHl7BHOl9HBENDgUvcqQ04QumbVNfVu-FM/edit
6
Different TLD Types-- Categories were considered in the original policy development process, but were deemed to be too challenging to identify, differentiate, and implement with only hypothetical scenarios to consider. --
-- No existing policy recommendations exist in regards to categories of gTLDs.
-- The 2012 round of the New gTLD Program provides real world examples of possible categories.
-- Specification 13 provides evidence that different requirements may be necessary based on the usage and purpose of TLDs.
-- Categorization or differentiation of gTLDs is anticipated to have effects on other mechanisms within the New gTLD Program (e.g., application requirements, evaluation, base agreement, post-delegation activities, etc.)
-- Categories should not be established just for the sake of creating them - there should be a tangible difference in the application process, Registry Agreement, or other factor that creates a need to carve out a category.
-- Different categories of TLDs may have differing levels of complexity, some of which could be taken into account for determining if certain categories could be carved out for a discrete application window.
-- There is a generally support for maintaining the existing categories in the AGB, from the 2012 round, and including .BRANDs as an additional category. However, there is a mixed level of support for adding categories, given the likely complexities in doing so.
-- There is concern with the lengthy list of different categories listed in the CC1 questionnaire, with some noting that different legal forms may not warrant a distinct category of TLDs. It was also noted that a TLD may fall into multiple categories.
-- There was some support for application windows being open to only specific categories (e.g., Brands), though it was noted that this may promote manipulation by potential applicants who will be incentivized to fit their TLD applications into any categories for which preferences are given.
-- DRAFTING TEAM CONVENED		-- Preliminarily, the WG has agreed at a high level that there are likely benefits to maintaining the existing categories of TLDs as identified in the AGB, plus BRANDS. There is not consensus that there should be additional categories added beyond these.
-- The WG has identified a set of preliminary candidate categories to consider when discussing topics in the Work Track Sub Teams. The WG is seeking to define the characteristics of the preliminary set of categories identified, then determine what changes could be needed.
-- Therefore, the WG has agreed to form a drafting team to identify/create:
-- A matrix that attempts to pinpoint the specific characteristicss of the categories
-- The related changes to the application process, evaluation criteria, and contractual requirements that would likely be necessary and perhaps unique to certain categories/characteristics.
-- Any enforcement mechanisms that may be needed as a result of establishing different paths to obtaining a new gTLD.
-- A recommendation as to whether the creation of applicable categories is necessary or whether the unique aspects of those categories can be handled through the existing processes.
TBDDeliberations
7
Application Submission Limits
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100