[nc-review] Draft DNSO Review report, version 2.0
Task Force Members,
Please find attached the revised DNSO Review Task Force Report for your
review. I apologize for not getting the version 2.0 to the Task Force
earlier. You'll note that revisions in version 2.0 are based on NC Jan. 24th
conference call, subsequent comments received, and per NC vote, inclusion of
listing of issues polled in the Working Group (mainly inclusion of footnotes
and links to comments/discussions, annex of issues polled in the Working
Group). You'll see that the recommendations are in italiques, as they are in
draft and only suggestions for further comment.
You'll note there are some footnotes and areas that need filling in, and
where with some the assistance of the secretariat would be most appreciated.
However, in the interest of getting the revised draft to the Task Force b/f
going to the DNSO public comment time, the draft is sent to this list now
(the typo's will be corrected, of course :-)).
According the schedule discussed on the NC call, and distributed earlier,
the draft Task Force DNSO Review Report will be posted for Dnso public
From: Theresa Swinehart [mailto:Theresa.Swinehart@wcom.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 21, 2001 10:36 PM
Cc: 'names council'
Subject: Draft DNSO Review report, version 1.0
First, I apologize for the delay in getting this to the Review Task Force.
Aside from the enormous numbers of substantive comments, an unanticipated
change in my own travel schedule caused some slight delays.
Attached is the first draft for the Task Force review. The report is not
intended to be complete, it is a draft for input by the other task force
members. Please also note that there are citations still to be filled in,
and blanks to be filled, including recommendations. If any comments
submitted to the Task Force by individuals, constituencies, or members of
constituencies, have not been listed, please note so they can be added to
the report. Under some recommendations, thoughts on recommendations have
been added, but there are merely thoughts, and in no way final, but rather
for discussion in the Task Force and the Names Council call.
Please also note there is no pride in authorship here (and there will be
some grammar editing/etc. to better streamline any more final product :-)
and once comments have been incorporated). This is a preliminary draft for
your input as Task Force members. Please note that we have a very short turn
around due to the extensions resulting from the Working Group. Therefore,
input is sought, and the draft will also be forwarded soon to the Names
Council conference call to allow NC members a chance to read b/f the call on
Thank you to all who provided comment and input. Thank you in advance.