RE: [nc-whois] CONFERENCE CALL
The operator did try to call you. She checked in with me seveal times during the
first part of the call to advise me she was unable to reach you. There is a transcrpt
but for the short hand, we are working as a full TF next Monday, 11-1:00 p.m EST to
draft the short term recommendations, adn then will work in small teams on
items 2 and 3 and longer term recommendations on 1 and 4.
That sounds cryptic... Thomas, can you give Abel a bit longer explanation?
From: Abel Wisman [mailto:email@example.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 7:41 AM
Subject: [nc-whois] CONFERENCE CALL
I never got the call, so I assume at the time of call I was "out of
reach" (yes it even happens in these parts of the world)
I would however appreciate a quick rundown on the talk, can anyone
provide some notes ?
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf
Of Thomas Roessler
Sent: 14 November 2002 12:27
Subject: [nc-whois] editorial question
Thinking about our work plan, I have a question: Do we really have
to produce a comprehensive all-4-issues-report until the week of
An alternative I could think of would be to limit the "official"
November 24 report to the "low-hanging fruits" - this should allow
us to streamline our work on that report very much, and to reduce
Under the assumption (!) that only the low-hanging fruits require a
Names Council vote in Amsterdam, we could then slightly later
produce a second report on the remaining issues (as far as we have
material on them) which would mainly try to give a systematic
overview of the possible policy options we have encountered, and of
the comments and inputs received during our conference calls and
through the comment period.
Thomas Roessler <firstname.lastname@example.org>