RE: [gnso-dow123] For your review: DRAFT Preliminary Task Force Report on the Whois Service

["Metalitz, Steven" <met@xxxxxxx>]

Maria, 
 
Thanks for circulating this, I will review before Monday's meeting.   A
couple of questions for Jordyn or the group as a whole: 
(1)  Are the constituencies going to be asked for new statements on the
terms of reference that were not covered in the report issued earlier
this year (March)?  
 
(2)  If so, how does this fit into our timeline regarding the public
comment period?
 
(3)  In either case, why would we reprint in this report the
constituency statements on TORs that were already contained in the final
report on those TORs issued last March?  (I am assuming that the
omission of the IPC constituency statement from Maria's draft is an
oversight, but the larger question is why these statements should be in
this report at all.)  
 
Steve

________________________________

From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Maria Farrell
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2006 12:16 PM
To: gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gnso-dow123] For your review: DRAFT Preliminary Task Force
Report on the Whois Service


Dear all,
 
Attached is the DRAFT preliminary Task Force Report on the Whois Service
for your review ahead of the next task force call (Monday next, 23rd
October). 
 
Next Monday's call will discuss the draft report's structure and
content, and provide feedback on revisions to it. I would particularly
welcome your feedback on whether it will be helpful to include under
each term of reference a summary of the task force's discussion. This
could be a useful way to record broad areas of agreement and
disagreement which are not currently captured in the treatments of the
proposals. 
 
All the best, Maria