ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [dow3tf] Registrar amendments to IPC draft

I agree we should use this list to discuss the drafting rather than rely on the call. We don't make much progress on the phone. After a quick read, I think we're heading in a more sensible direction. I'm sick with bronchitis so I'll have to read it again to give you a thorough response, but I think the NCUC would accept the Registrars' amendments to the draft. Thanks to both of you for your work. I'll try and join the call tomorrow. Best, Frannie

Hash: SHA1

On 19/10/2004 3:55 PM Brian Darville noted that;
| Ross:
| You should not assume acceptance from silence.  The IPC views the
changes as greatly diminishing any meaningful progress on data accuracy
so I don't think many members of the IPC view your proposed changes as
progress.  We can discuss this further on the call tomorrow.

Are there any specifics that we could cover in advance? We don't seem to be making much progress discussing these proposals 40 minutes at a time every seven days. We might be able to cover more if we relied more heavily on the mailing list and other resources at our disposal. - --

~ -rwr

~ "Every contrivance of man, every tool, every instrument, ~ every utensil, every article designed for use, of each ~ and every kind, evolved from very simple beginnings." ~ - Robert Collier

Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com My Blogware: http://www.byte.org

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.3-nr1 (Windows XP)



Frannie Wellings
Policy Fellow, the Electronic Privacy Information Center ~ http://www.epic.org
Director, The Public Voice ~ http://www.thepublicvoice.org

1718 Connecticut Ave. N.W., Suite 200
Washington, D.C.  20009


+1 202 483 1140 x 107 (telephone)
+1 202 483 1248 (fax)

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>