RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Bouncing of Emails

["Mike Rodenbaugh" <icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ugh, see it just happened again...  I realize ultimately it is within my
control to send from the correct address every time.  But literally half my
email seems related to ICANN and it is annoying to have to change my 'send
from' address every time I send an ICANN-related email.  It ought to be a
very simple technical fix to allow multiple 'send from' email accounts to
ICANN lists, but only have the lists 'send to' one account so I don't get
two copies of everything.

Also, when an account isn't authorized, the sender ought to get a bounce
notice.  Again, seemingly a very simple technical fix, if the right person
can be located on ICANN Staff.

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
http://rodenbaugh.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Rodenbaugh [mailto:mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 9:18 AM
To: 'Margie Milam'; 'Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx'
Cc: 'Glen de Saint Géry'
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] Bouncing of Emails

Thanks Margie, but that does not answer either of my questions, both
supported also by Jeff.

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
http://rodenbaugh.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Margie Milam
Sent: Friday, February 19, 2010 9:12 AM
To: icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Cc: brian.cute@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Glen de Saint Géry
Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] Bouncing of Emails


Hi Mike-

To answer your question, when you sign up for an email list,  only the
designated email alias is the one that can send emails to the list.   Some
people may use multiple email accounts and that may be the cause of
confusion regarding why emails don't seem to make the list.  

Brian,  have you sent any messages to the list?   As Milton pointed out,
they haven't surfaced on the archives. 
If so, please send Glen a request to add any other email accounts to the
list.

Thanks,

Margie
___________
Margie Milam
Senior Policy Counselor
ICANN
___________

________________________________________
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mike Rodenbaugh [icann@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 5:03 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] proposed rewording of Objective 5 - resend

Side questions to Staff re sending to lists from the wrong address...

When that happens, why does the recipient not get a bounce notice?!  That
really ought to happen, I know some of my emails have never gone anywhere
because I send from the wrong address and never realized it until far after
their relevance had passed (or never realized it).

More importantly, why can't I subscribe to send to lists from several emails
so I don't have to remember which one to send from..., yet only have the
list send to one of my addresses?  This seems like it ought to be feasible,
since I can think of it and it is a problem that afflicts anyone trying to
keep voluminous ICANN email separate from personal and business accounts....

Thanks for looking into it, if possible, and letting us know who on Staff
would handle this request.

Mike Rodenbaugh
RODENBAUGH LAW
tel/fax:  +1 (415) 738-8087
http://rodenbaugh.com


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Avri Doria
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 3:05 PM
To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] proposed rewording of Objective 5 - resend


(sent during the meeting but from the wrong address and it was rejected)


The friendly amendment:

Using all information that has been collected by ICANN to date determine
whether ...

a.



On 17 Feb 2010, at 13:46, Milton L Mueller wrote:

>
>
> Objective 5: To determine whether the changes to the current restrictions
and/or practices concerning registry-registrar separation and equal access
contained in the options set out in DAGv3 constitute an unacceptable
deviation from current policies regarding registry-registrar sewparation.
>
> Rationale: this does not require research or an open-ended assessment of
the entire registry-registrar market, but a simple determination that the
DAGv3 proposals are an unauthorized policy change.
>
> --MM
>