[ PINKY ] • BRAND

Domain Name Industry Knowledge


1 Comment

New gTLD Delegation Date Calculator – UPDATED

NOTE TO READERS: I originally posted this via the DomainDiction blog on 11 January, but since have updated the calculator and updated my comments below.  You can download the updated version here.

I’ve put together a little scenario calculator on a spreadsheet in the quest to figure out some idea of when a new gTLD might be delegated into the root zone by simply entering in the known ‘Draw number’ for the TLD application.

Hopefully it’s simple enough to understand on its own, but if you care to watch my 4-minute explanation video it might give you a better flavor for my logic in the assumptions.

My assumptions are based on the following metrics:

  • Assumed Initial Evaluation Rate (IE) Processing Rate per week by ICANN
  • I’m saying it’s 30 per week for now, but ICANN says it could ramp up to 150 per week.
  • Assumed Metering Rate per Week for pre-delegation testing (PDT) and Root Zone Entry (Delegation Processing).
  • ICANN says no more than 1,000 new gTLDs delegated in a year, so that implies a PDT and delegation rate of about 20 per week. It’s been stated that this could be ramped up to 80 or 100 per week.
  • Date ICANN has stated it will start process of releasing IE results
    • That’s 23 March 2013 at the moment
  • “Fudge Factor” – # of days PDT and beyond processes are delayed due to uknown/unforeseen issues
    • We all know there have been/will be delays. At present ICANN says on it’s microsite that first delegation requests begin on 1 August 2013, so for now I’ve added 110 days to the process as the ‘fudge factor’ to force a first delegation date in the calculated results for Priority String 1 to = 1 Aug 2013. You can change this if you believe otherwise.
    • Of course if Fadi’s comments at the recent regional ICANN meeting in Amsterdam come to life then you may want to change this to 365 days. 😦
  • # of days after IE for Contracting
    • I’m going with 7 assuming there is no negotiation and the applicant signs the standard deal. We all know back and forth and paperwork and lawyering can make this longer, but I’m thinking motivated applicants will move very fast and have some advance knowledge what they are dealing with before they even get to this stage
  • # of days to process PDT
    • I’m going with 7 based on what I’ve read. Change it if you don’t agree
  • # of days for ICANN to submit root zone delegation request after applicant passes PDT
    • ICANN is currently thinking the max. would be 10 business days. I translate that to 14 calendar days.
  • # of days for IANA to process root zone delegation request
    • ICANN is currently thinking the max. would be 30 business days. I translate that to 42 calendar days.
  • # of days after Delegation before Sunrise Period begins
    • 30 according to the Strawman proposal that all parties seem to be OK with at this time. That’s the minimum. You can change this if you think it will be longer.

If you don’t agree with my assumption metrics, or just want to play around with various ‘what if’ scenarios then have at it as I’ve designed it so you can change the numbers.

The output of the calculator provides:

  • Date initial evaluation results are released by ICANN (for the input Draw #)
  • Estimated Contracting completion date
  • Estimated PDT completion date
  • Estimated Delegation date
  • Estimated Sunrise Period start date

IMPORTANT:

The calculator assumes no Contention Sets, no negative GAC advice, no Formal Objections, no delays with financials, contracting, PDT, delegation, lawsuits, Fadi decides to stop everything for 1 year, etc. It does not formally take into account that ICANN may not start any delegation requests until 1 August 2013 as currently displayed on the ICANN new gTLD microsite. It does not formally take into account that ICANN has stated that no contracting will begin until after the April ICANN meeting in Beijing is completed.

WHAT ABOUT ACCOUNTING FOR CONTENTION SETS?

If you know that x number of contention sets are ahead of your draw #, then consider inputting an artificially lower # to generate an alternative scenario. For example: Your draw # is 942 but you believe 200 contention sets exist where the highest draw # is lower than yours — so input 742 instead.

If you feel that reasonably 100 of the 200 contention sets ahead of you might be resolved ahead of your draw #, then consider entering 842 instead.

NOTE: This tool is purely speculative, based on some facts and plenty of opinion. Finally, as many know over the years following and participating the process, the situation is likely to change. I may have made some mistakes. Don’t rely on this to make business plans.

You can download the updated version here.