[tf2-sg2] DAT 2 --- the consent piece
Per our discussion last Friday, please see attached. Steve Metalitz -----Original Message----- From: Jordyn A. Buchanan [mailto:jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:00 AM To: Steve Metalitz Cc: Thomas Roessler; GNSO Secretariat; tf2-sg2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [tf2-sg2] How to proceed? Okay, let's try to talk at 10 AM tomorrow. Glen: can you set that up? Jordyn On Mar 18, 2004, at 9:55 AM, Steve Metalitz wrote: > I would be available for a short call at 10 am EST tomorrow (Friday). > > I did not receive any earlier message from Thomas either. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Roessler [mailto:roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 9:44 AM > To: Jordyn A.Buchanan > Cc: GNSO SECRETARIAT; tf2-sg2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [tf2-sg2] How to proceed? > > > I could probably join a call at 10am Eastern tomorrow. > > On 2004-03-18 09:25:24 -0500, Jordyn A.Buchanan wrote: >> From: "Jordyn A.Buchanan" <jordyn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> To: Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Cc: GNSO SECRETARIAT <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, >> tf2-sg2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:25:24 -0500 >> Subject: Re: [tf2-sg2] How to proceed? >> X-Spam-Level: >> >> Hi Thomas: >> >> For some reason, I didn't receive your earlier message. I'm in the >> midst of a bit of an e-mail migration, though, so it may have arrived >> in the midst of that. >> >> I agree that we should have a call and need to put together some of >> the >> data that we've seen thus far. Does anyone have availability >> tomorrow? >> Unfortunately, I have a pretty narrow window of opportunity, from >> about 8 AM until 11 AM Eastern Time. >> >> Jordyn >> >> On Mar 18, 2004, at 4:58 AM, Thomas Roessler wrote: >> >>> Thanks, that's what I was looking for. >>> >>> I note, though, that there was no feed-back to my earlier suggestion >>> to set up a conference call for this sub-group. If members are >>> currently unable to make the necessary time commitments, I'd suggest >>> that we get back to the entire task force with these news and try to >>> draft some more support. >>> >>> Regards, >>> -- >>> Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On 2004-03-17 09:36:20 +0100, GNSO Secretariat wrote: >>>> From: GNSO SECRETARIAT <gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> To: tf2-sg2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:36:20 +0100 >>>> Subject: RE: [tf2-sg2] How to proceed? >>>> Reply-To: gnso.secretariat@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> X-Spam-Level: >>>> >>>> Could it be this: >>>> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/dow2tf/msg00076.html >>>> see also >>>> http://gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/raa-whois-16dec03.shtml >>>> >>>> GNSO Secretariat >>>> >>>> mardi 16 mars 2004 11:28 Thomas Roessler a ecrit >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> we should probably spend some time on figuring out what we report >>>> back to the task force and the ICANN community at large on current >>>> practice with respect to WHOIS. I'd suggest we schedule a >>>> conference call for some day later this week. >>>> >>>> We will have to look at the material that we received pre Rome, and >>>> the staff's report on registrars' current practice in implementing >>>> policies related to notification of and consent by registrants. >>>> (Glen, Barbara: Where's that report, again? I have the feeling that >>>> I've received a copy some time ago, but have lost it.) Also, there's >>>> a response from .pl directly to Task Force 3, and the CENTR survey >>>> at <http://www.centr.org/meetings/ga-21/WHOIS-paper-v1.0.pdf>; see >>>> also >>>> <http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/dow3tf/msg00112.html>. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > At-Large Advisory Committee: http://alac.info/ > Attachment:
DOMAIN NAMES Whois TF2 Data Analysis 2 Consent rml sjm 032404.doc
|