RE: [nc-org] wrap up

[Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>]

On Thu, 29 Nov 2001, at 09:52 [=GMT-0400], Guillermo Carey C. wrote:

> I am OK with your suggestion and interpretation. I believe that the rest of
> the group share this view.

Fine with me!

Marc

> 
> 
> 
> > Guillermo Carey
> > Carey y Cía. Ltda.
> > Tel.: (56-2) 365 7284
> > Fax: (56-2) 3657319
> > 
> > Visite nuestra página WEB www.carey.cl
> > 
> > La información contenida en esta transmisión es confidencial, y no puede
> ser usada, por otras personas que su(s) destinatario(s). El uso no
> autorizado de la información contenida en esta transmisión puede ser
> sancionado criminalmente de conformidad con el Código Penal Chileno. Si ha
> recibido esta transmisión por error, por favor destrúyala y notifique al
> remitente telefónicamente, con cobro revertido o vía e-mail.
> > 
> > The information contained in this transmission is privileged, and may not
> be used, by any person other than its addressee(s). Unauthorized use of the
> information contained in this transmission may be punished under the Chilean
> Criminal Code. If received in error, please destroy and notify the sender by
> calling collect or by e-mail.
> > 
> 
> 
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@syr.edu]
> Enviado el: Miércoles, 28 de Noviembre de 2001 18:57
> Para: gcarey@carey.cl; nc-org@dnso.org
> Asunto: RE: [nc-org] wrap up
> 
> 
> Guillermo:
> I think it is a very clear part of existing language
> and existing understandings that Section 3 is
> fully consistent with current requirements for
> accurate contact info and complaints about 
> false contact data. 
> 
> I have no problem with the language
> modification you propose in the first bullet:
> 
> "· Must not attempt to impose ANY NEW prior 
> restrictions on people or organizations attempting 
> to register names"
> 
> I will make this change.
> 
> But the second one is totally unnecessary, 
> and somewhat awkward. The current language 
> already clearly states "NEW" dispute initiation
> procedures. By your own statement, a complaint 
> of false contact data can ALREADY trigger 
> revocation of a registration. So I see no way
> that the existing language could be 
> construed to rule out such practices. Also,
> Section 6 already explicitly references 
> adherence to existing contact info policies.
> 
> OK? 
> 
>