ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[gnso-dow123]


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

Re: [gnso-dow123] Proposed revision #2

  • To: ross@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [gnso-dow123] Proposed revision #2
  • From: "David W. Maher" <dmaher@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 15:04:11 -0500

As a "placeholder" it serves its purpose - it is a concept to find a way out of the current situation. We don't need to get specific at this point. It would be inappropriate to ignore it.

At 02:30 PM 8/31/2005, Ross Rader wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

The language is a placeholder for a concept that is current undefined,
let alone agreed on. I'm quite familiar with the range of proposals
regarding tiered access - which one does this refer to? Unless we're
pointing at a specific protocol or policy, I think its appropriate that
we remain silent on the issue...


On 31/08/2005 3:25 PM David W. Maher noted that; > "may use...as a means" is hardly an institutionalization. I can't > believe that we are so ignorant of tiered access. > David > > > At 02:13 PM 8/31/2005, Ross Rader wrote: > > I think we should leave all possible resolutions open, but to > institutionalize one specific one that we have no real understanding of > doesn't seem prudent. > > On 31/08/2005 2:30 PM David W. Maher noted that; >> As stated in the preamble: >> "The Task Force believes that there is an ongoing risk of conflict >> between a registrar's or registry's legal obligations under local >> privacy laws and their contractual obligations to ICANN. TF2 Report, >> Section 2.3, > > http://www.gnso.icann.org/issues/whois-privacy/Whois-tf2-preliminary.html. > > >> We are looking for procedures to reduce or eliminate the conflict. > If we >> restrict ourselves to making all (or some) data publicly available, or >> concealing all (or some) data, we will never reach a consensus. Tiered >> access as a concept is an obvious way forward to find some consensus to >> solve this problem. >> David > > > >> At 11:55 AM 8/31/2005, Ross Rader wrote: > >> On 30/08/2005 5:08 PM Jordyn A. Buchanan noted that; >>> This proposal is from the Registry Constituency. It would add an >>> additional paragraph to the end of the policy recommendation, as >> follows: > >>> 3) Registrars and registries may use tiered access as a means of >>> complying with local legal requirements when applicable. > >> We've not had any discussions regarding tiered access. It would be >> appropriate to eliminate this from the draft and keep this discussion >> off the table until we are in a position to deal with the technical and >> policy issues surrounding the proposal. > >> -- >> -- >> Regards, > > > >> -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 > > -- > -- > Regards, > > > > -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

- --
- --
Regards,



                       -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)

iD8DBQFDFgVV6sL06XjirooRAvW+AJ0UHpFyX5zDxCyu9Cc3dophhtArUQCfXyeZ
fqXJSd4HmZ7AsiNAoEE6Zkw=
=Ygrk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy