RE: [gnso-dt-wg] DT Outcomes Report - new draft, 1.3

["Jeffrey Eckhaus" <jeckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tim,

 

The areas where I commented on users comments is the way that I read the 
report, I am not commenting on the validity of anyone's comments, I actually 
agree with many and think they are correct, I just wanted it to be noted as 
they are opinions of the respondents, not facts from this committee.

 

The ccTLD comment is based on what I read in this report such as the reports 
below

 

.DE (Germany)/ Stephan Welzel

Domain tasting is not an issue under .de at all because we do not have an Add 
Grace Period. Such an Add Grace Period is not needed in our case because we 
charge our members ("registrars") not yearly but monthly fees so that they have 
to pay only for a month, not a full year, if they register a domain name and 
then discover that they (or their customers) didn't actually want to register 
it.

 

NL (The Netherlands)/ Roelof Meijer

.NL has a seven-day grace period to correct DNS errors, but not an add-grace 
period like other TLDs. Upon (first) registration, the registrant pays € 0.50 
for the registration and € 0.90 subscription fee per quarter

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 10:37 AM
To: Jeffrey Eckhaus
Cc: Olof Nordling; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] DT Outcomes Report - new draft, 1.3

 

Jeff, I don't agree with your suggested changes.

 

1.2 The responses were a fair cross-section in my opinion. In fact,

registrants, non-commercial, and individual internet users outnumber the

IP respondents. The registry and registrar count may seem low but are

not when considering the population of each category.

 

The comment in the report regarding ccTLDs' AGP is based on the actual

responses received from the ccTLDs. I believe it is accurate as written.

 

4.1 The report is not declaring Mark Monitor's and CADNA reports as

statistical and factual. It is simply saying that some respondents

listed them in response to that question, which is absolutely true.

 

Regarding the eight responses submitted through the email list, no such

assertion of fact is being made. It simply says the responses were

included in the overview of the Big Pulse results. So you may not agree

with the contents of those responses, but it would be inappropriate to

characterize them any differently than the other results. Since I

submitted one of those responses I object to any attempt to have this

report cast dispersions on any of the responses that people have gone

through the time and trouble to submit, whether I agree with them or

not.

 

 

Tim 

 

 

-------- Original Message --------

Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] DT Outcomes Report - new draft, 1.3

From: "Jeffrey Eckhaus" <jeckhaus@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

Date: Wed, September 26, 2007 8:28 am

To: "Olof Nordling" <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>,  <gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx>

 

Here are my comments in the document. There are only a few

 

Thanks

 

Jeff

 

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: Olof Nordling [mailto:olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 4:44 AM

To: Jeffrey Eckhaus; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx

Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] DT Outcomes Report - new draft, 1.3

 

Jeff,

Redline version (for many small changes) or text in a mail or annex (for

longer single pieces) or any other method you may think of - your

choice,

really. Thanks for asking!

Best regards

Olof

 

-----Original Message-----

From: owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On

Behalf Of Jeffrey Eckhaus

Sent: den 26 september 2007 02:53

To: Olof Nordling; gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx

Subject: RE: [gnso-dt-wg] DT Outcomes Report - new draft, 1.3

 

 

Olof,

 

What is the preferred method for sending comments? 

 

Thanks

 

Jeff

 

 

-----Original Message-----

From: owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx] On

Behalf Of Olof Nordling

Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 11:02 AM

To: gnso-dt-wg@xxxxxxxxx

Subject: [gnso-dt-wg] DT Outcomes Report - new draft, 1.3

 

Dear all,

Attached please find a new version of the report for your review and

comments.

Changes in this one are:

- Mike's comments incorporated

- comments included in Annex 2 for 8 RFI email responses 

- BigPulse overview updated with manually entered ballots for the same

- corresponding figures updated in section 4.1

- some typos rectified

Wishing you happy reading!

Olof