ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-dow123]


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

RE: [gnso-dow123] Proposal Premise Presupposes Publication

  • To: <KathrynKL@xxxxxxx>, <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>, <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>, <gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Proposal Premise Presupposes Publication
  • From: <Niklas_Lagergren@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:13:59 +0200

At this stage, it is pure speculation to assess whether this is a
"stop-gap" measure or not. Only time will tell. I don't think we should
try to extrapolate too much on this issue.

 

It is obvious that assumptions differ among task force members on this
topic: some consider there is potentially a substantial number of cases
that would trigger the launch of the procedure outlined in draft
Recommendation 2, whereas some other consider that the number of cases
would be minuscule (if any at all).

 

Notwithstanding these differing views, it used to be encouraging to see
that there seemed to be a large consensus within the old TF1-2 that it
would be useful to have some sort of procedure in place, "just in case".
This consensus now seems to fade away within the new consolidated
TF1-2-3. I share Tom's frustration (that I believe he expressed during
the call, sorry if I am misquoting you) that it feels like starting all
over again... 

 

I would support finalizing the text of Recommendation 2 with amendments
deemed appropriate by the TF members, but not burden it with appendices
or speculation about the future, and move on to the next topics on the
TF's plate, as outlined by Jordyn at the end of the call.    

 

  _____  

From: KathrynKL@xxxxxxx [mailto:KathrynKL@xxxxxxx] 
Sent: mardi 26 avril 2005 20:32
To: tim@xxxxxxxxxxx; ross@xxxxxxxxxx; gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Proposal Premise Presupposes Publication

 

It was felt early on that the full discussion would take a very long
time -- and in the meantime we should have an exception process to allow
those registrars who need it to come into compliance with their privacy
laws.  Stopping midstream might not be the best idea.  K

        It doesn't appear to me to be presented as a stop-gap measure.
If that is the intent, then I suggest we instead step back and consider
other options before moving forward with this recommendation.

         

        Tim

 



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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy