[gnso-sl-wg] urgent request to the technical experts

["Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Steve and Mark

 

We have not heard back from you regarding our request that you agree with
our interpretation of your input. We greatly appreciate your participation
in the Working Group's consultation. However, we need to get your responses
in the next 24 hours. 

 

We are getting close to the deadline for input to the final report. We are
hoping to finalize comments from each of you in the next 24 hours.  Patrick
Jones, ICANN staff, and I will serve as the interfaces to verify your
comments. You can email your comments to the full list, as well. 

 

Marilyn Cade 

 

 

  _____  

From: Marilyn Cade [mailto:marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2007 4:53 PM
To: 'Steven M. Bellovin'; 'mcfadden@xxxxxxxxxx'
Cc: 'Patrick Jones'; 'gnso-sl-wg@xxxxxxxxx'
Subject: Request to technical experts regarding the recommendations
discussed on 4/23 

 

Dear Steve and Mark

I am writing at the request of Greg Shatan, chair of the Sub Group on Single
and Two letter names of the Reserved Names Working Group. We need your
assistance in helping us to accurately convey your views as technical
experts, in the report that the Sub Group is preparing on the use of single
and two characters at the top and second levels in domain names. You will
recall that you participated in an interactive conference call consultation
on April 23 regarding some questions around the recommendations that the sub
group is proposing on the status of certain characters (numbers, letters,
symbols) in gTLDs. The specific purpose of the discussion was to focus in on
four categories under discussion. There are some other categories under
discussion at the full RN WG, such as IDNs, but those were not the purpose
of our consultation with you.  We did do a transcription of the call, but
the quality is pretty poor, and in some cases, the content of the discussion
was not captured by the transcriptions, thus, we cannot count on it as an
accurate record. In addition, we believe that we should verify your comments
with you, to ensure that we are accurate. 

Please note that we are sending you the full report, and asking that you in
particular review the sections/recommendations that were discussed with you
last week. You will find them on pages 13 - 19, items 1.4 through 1.7.  For
all four categories, we ask that you each review these sections and send us
back an email, copied to the sub group list, noting your agreement [or if
applicable: disagreement/concern/issues] to the recommendation(s). both
sections 1.4 and 1.5 are receiving a further review and there may be a few
small changes in those two write ups, but you should receive any changes by
tomorrow. Recommendations 1.6 and 1.7 are largely complete; 1.7 has two
questions for you both, which are noted in the body of the recommendation.
Of course, we welcome any clarifications that you might provide to the
existing text that you think is needed.  To make it similar for you, and for
us, can we ask that you send a separate email with your comments, rather
than marking up the draft report? That would be much appreciated.  Can you
also advise us of RFCs that you think are relevant that we may have omitted?


We greatly appreciate your time and expertise. In order to meet our deadline
of finalizing the full WG report by next Tuesday, we are asking that you
provide your comments as quickly as possible, and at the latest by mid day
Monday. We apologize for the short turn around. 

Please feel free to email me or the chair, Greg Shatan, with questions or
clarifications. I have also copied Patrick Jones, ICANN staff, who is
supporting the Working Group.  You can also call me at 202 360 1196. Again,
we apologize for the short turn around, but greatly appreciate your
assistance. 

 

Best regards, Marilyn Cade