DNSO Discuss Mail Archive Archive Subject Directory

[Author Index Start]	[Subject Index Start]	[Date Index Start]
[Author Directory]	[Subject Directory]	[Date Directory]

Re:
"constitutional protections"
"preliminary" accreditation?
"Unanointed" Registrars Worry About Their Future
Re: (?) Standards set for registering Net domain names
(Fwd) Re: sovereignty meaning attached to domain names
Re: (Nearly) everything is feasible
(no subject)
.NU Domain Has a Governance Model
Re: .us - various issues
12 Commandments of flaming
blaxxun Provides Virtual Reality Interface for Ticketmaster® Online's New Service
IMÑORTANT: Teleconf on Saturday 23
Re: [IFWP] Press Communiqué
???
?Existe esta lista?
Re: [[dnsproc-en] new math]
Re: [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject: Unsavory Individuals "NetKooks"
Re: [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject: Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"
[baf@fausett.com: Fwd: Report on Teleconference]
Re: [bwg-n-friends] Re: Latest iteration of bylaws
[chon@cosmos.kaist.ac.kr: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?]
Re: [discuss] test michel a
Re: [dnso.discuss] Draft New Draft
Re: [dnso.discuss] drj response to Kent -- long
Re: [dnso.discuss] Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines and NCDNHC definition
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IDNO:119] Support Statement
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] BMW Procedural Problems
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] BMW Procedural Problems
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] BMW Procedural Problems
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] BMW Procedural Problems
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [ifwp] January 17th ICANN Teleconference
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [ifwp] January 17th ICANN Teleconference
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: do we want to have constituenc
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: do we want to have constituenc
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN & DNSO
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Timely decisions
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Timely decisions
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Timely decisions
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Timely decisions
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Timely decisions
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: Amendments to Paris Draft
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Discuss constituencies, don't call for them to meet
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Discuss constituencies, don't call for them to meet
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Discuss constituencies, don't call for them to meet
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings i n singapore next month?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
RE: [dnso.discuss] Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Flawed Drafts submitted to ICANN
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Fwd: [IFWP] Did Cook really do his Homework (etc.)
Re: [dnso.discuss] RE: ICANN & DNSO
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Paris Draft Site Up with Full Draft Text
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: Supermajorities
Re: [dnso.discuss] Tell him "Enough!", Ms. Van Houweling
Re: [dnsproc-en] .com versus .org
FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
RE: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
RE: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
RE: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
RE: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
RE: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
RE: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: FW: [dnsproc-en] DNS Lotto: You Gotta Be In It To Win It
Re: [dnsproc-en] Re: .com versus .org
[Fwd: (no subject)]
[Fwd: [dnsproc-en-announce] New Release Date for Final Report]
[Fwd: [dnsproc-en-announce] Release of Final Report of the WIPO Internet Domain Name Process]
[Fwd: [dnsproc-en] Release of Final Report of the WIPO Internet Domain Name Process]
[Fwd: [Fwd: merge5.txt]]
Re: [Fwd: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats]
Re: [Fwd: [IFWP] Proof! (fwd) [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject: Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"]
FW: [Fwd: [IFWP] The Jeff Williams Report]
[Fwd: [XCERT-ANNOUNCE] XCERT INTRODUCES SENTRY CA 3.5]
[Fwd: BMW proposals for further disucssion]
Re: [Fwd: BMW proposals for further disucssion]
Re: [Fwd: BMW proposals for further disucssion]
[Fwd: DNSO Status Report and Draft Bylaws Changes]
Re: [Fwd: DNSO Status Report and Draft Bylaws Changes]
[Fwd: FYI Recieved and interesting thretening call]
[Fwd: ICANN Bylaw changes posted]
[Fwd: ICANN Names Competitive Domain-Name Registrars]
[Fwd: ICANN Press Communiqué on Berlin Meeting Results]
[Fwd: INEGroup Protest of NIST Solicitation No. 52SBNT9C1020]
[Fwd: List of ICANN Registrars]
RE: [Fwd: merge5.txt]
Re: [Fwd: merge5.txt]
Re: [Fwd: Press Release: ICANN Taps Twomey to Lead its Govt. Advisory Comm ittee]
Jan 17th ICANN Board minutes 'released'
Re: [Fwd: Press Release: ICANN Taps Twomey to Lead its Govt. Advisory Comm ittee]
Re: [Fwd: Press Release: ICANN Taps Twomey to Lead its Govt.Advisory Comm ittee]
[Fwd: Proposal to ICANN]
FW: [Fwd: release]
[Fwd: The Governmental Advisory Committee of ICANN and its agenda]
[Fwd: Yet another John Charles Broomfield? How many are there? Re: jbroom@MANTA.OUTREMER.COM,]
[iana@ISI.EDU: SO note]
Re: [IDNO:119] Support Statement
Re: [IFWP] "...for which they qualify"
Re: [ifwp] (fwd) New Internet group urged to be more accountable
Re: [ifwp] A New Paradigm (was: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?)
Re: [ifwp] Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [IFWP] Announcement of the new TLD Association (TLDA)
Re: [IFWP] Announcement of the new TLD Association (TLDA) Subtitle: COnstituencies are silly...
Re: [IFWP] As ICANN unravels ISOC launches Smear campaign against Milton Meuller and Michael Sondow
Re: [IFWP] As ICANN unravels ISOC launches Smear campaign against Milton Meuller and Michael Sondow
Re: [IFWP] As ICANN unravels ISOC launches Smear campaign against Milton Meuller and Michael Sondow
RE: [ifwp] At-large Membership Committee sans at-large members
Re: [ifwp] Attention ICANN/Christopner Ambler: Sun wins injunction againstSun wins injunction against
Re: [IFWP] Board Resolution on Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Carl Oppedahl's wild estimates (was Re: Further analysis of MMs trademark study)
Re: [ifwp] cerveza
Re: [ifwp] Civil discourse (was Re: Secret meetings)
Re: [ifwp] Closed January 21 Washington meeting
Re: [ifwp] Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Constituencies / Membership
Re: [IFWP] Constituency insanity spreads
Re: [IFWP] Constituency record-keeping
RE: [IFWP] Continued manipulations of the NCDNHC by ISOC: How come to compromise with dishonest people?
Re: [ifwp] cTLD name considered harmful
Re: Fwd: [IFWP] Did Cook really do his Homework (etc.)
Re: [IFWP] Discussion of Constituency Formation
Re: [ifwp] DNSO (was Report from...)
Re: [IFWP] drj response to Kent -- long
Re: [IFWP] FW: DNSO lobbying tactics
Re: [IFWP] Goose and gander
Re: [ifwp] How not to define membership classes
Re: [IFWP] ICANN and WIPO in Berlin
RE: [IFWP] ICANN neo-colonialism
Re: [IFWP] ICANN Resolution on the WIPO Report
Re: [ifwp] Individual DNSO Membership [Was: Re: Monterey Report]
Re: [IFWP] Intellectual Property Constituency
Re: [IFWP] International trademarks
RE: [ifwp] IS it time for a new DNSO?
Re: [ifwp] January 17th ICANN Teleconference
Re: [IFWP] Lancelot Link, Secret Chimp was: As ICANN unravels ISOC launches Smear campaign against Milton Meuller and Michael Sondow
Re: [IFWP] Lancelot Link, Secret Chimp was: As ICANN unravels ISOC launches Smear campaign against Milton Meuller and Michael Sondow
FW: [ifwp] Letter of Invitation
RE: [IFWP] NCDNHC Credentials - CORRECTION
Re: [ifwp] NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats
Re: [ifwp] Objections to a flat structure ( was :Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?)
RE: [ifwp] Our Thanks and gratitude & Report
RE: [ifwp] Physical locations and meeting proximity.
Re: [ifwp] Polling [was IFWP Mailing List]
Re: [IFWP] Re: [dnso.discuss] Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
Re: [IFWP] Re: [dnso.discuss] Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
Re: [dnso.discuss] Re: [IFWP] Re: Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines a nd NCDNHC definition
Re: [IFWP] Re: [dnso.discuss] Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines and NCDNHC definition
Re: [IFWP] Re: [dnso.discuss] Modifications to ICIIU Guidelines and NCDNHC definition
Re: [IFWP] Re: [IDNO:87] Re: the non-commercial constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: [IDNO:87] Re: the non-commercial constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: [IDNO:87] Re: the non-commercial constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN Press Communiqué on Berlin MeetingResults
RE: [ifwp] Re: A Slow Day at Microsoft? (was Re: Multi-level lis
Re: [ifwp] Re: A Slow Day at Microsoft? (was Re: Multi-level list filtering)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
RE: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
RE: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
RE: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
RE: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
Re: [ifwp] RE: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
RE: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Berkman Center membership study -- Membership fees?
Re: [ifwp] RE: Boston Working Group response to ICANN amendments
Re: [IFWP] Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more!
Re: [IFWP] Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do wewant......?
Re: [IFWP] Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do wewant......?
Re: [IFWP] Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do wewant......?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Civil discourse (was Re: Secret meetings)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Commentary on ICC submission
Re: [ifwp] Re: Commentary on ICC submission
Re: [ifwp] Re: Commentary on ICC submission
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies / Membership
Re: [ifwp] Re: Constituencies / Membership
Re: [IFWP] Re: Criterion for placement on the List
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
DNSO = IRAQ/Sadam Hussain was:[ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last
RE: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last time)
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last time)
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last time)
Re: [ifwp] Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last time)
Re: [IFWP] Re: Esther Dyson Sells Out Internet Community
Re: [IFWP] Re: Esther Dyson Sells Out Internet Community
Re: [IFWP] Re: Esther Dyson Sells Out Internet Community
Re: [ifwp] Re: Evidence of DNSO.ORG closed dealings?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Evidence of DNSO.ORG closed dealings?
Re: [ifwp] Re: First draft IETF/IANA contract
Fwd: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: Fwd: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
RE: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: [ifwp] Re: ICANN ADDRESS-Supporting-Organization
Re: [ifwp] RE: Incorporation or not?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Individual DNSO Membership
Re: [ifwp] Re: Individual DNSO Membership
Re: [ifwp] Re: Interesting articles in Forbes and Chronicle of Higher Education
Re: [ifwp] Re: Interesting articles in Forbes and Chronicle of Higher Education
RE: [ifwp] Re: Invitation
Re: [ifwp] Re: Invitation
Re: [ifwp] RE: IS it time for a new DNSO?
RE: [ifwp] RE: IS it time for a new DNSO?
Re: [ifwp] RE: IS it time for a new DNSO?
RE: [ifwp] RE: IS it time for a new DNSO?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Microsoft's new browser
Re: [ifwp] Re: Microsoft's new browser
Re: [ifwp] Re: Microsoft's new browser
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterey Report
[ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
RE: [ifwp] Re: Monterrey Report
Re: [ifwp] Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
Re: [ifwp] Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
Re: [ifwp] Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
Re: [ifwp] Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
Re: [ifwp] Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
Re: [ifwp] Re: New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
Re: [ifwp] RE: Non-Commercial v. Commercial TLDs
Re: [ifwp] RE: Non-Commercial v. Commercial TLDs
Re: [ifwp] Re: NSI Technical Advisory Group: once again ICANN st acks the deck
Re: [ifwp] Re: NSI Technical Advisory Group: once again ICANN stacks the deck
Re: [ifwp] Re: NYTimes article on 2-letter TLDs
Re: [ifwp] Re: Objections to a flat structure
Re: [ifwp] Re: OFF TOPIC: Re: rumor: dnso.org and trademark community have cut a deal
Re: [ifwp] Re: open Washington meeting?
RE: [ifwp] Re: open Washington meeting?
RE: [ifwp] Re: open Washington meeting?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Perminant DOmain Names? Was:Re: Who is on the list
Re: [IFWP] Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
Re: [ifwp] Re: Physical locations and meeting proximity.
Re: [ifwp] Re: Physical locations and meeting proximity.
RE: [ifwp] RE: Physical locations and meeting proximity.
Re: [ifwp] Re: Physical locations and meeting proximity.
Re: [ifwp] Re: Physical locations and meeting proximity.
Re: [ifwp] Re: Position of the SOs vis-a-vis ICANN
Re: [ifwp] Re: Position of the SOs vis-a-vis ICANN
Re: [ifwp] Re: Position of the SOs vis-a-vis ICANN
Re: [ifwp] Re: Position of the SOs vis-a-vis ICANN
Re: [IFWP] Re: Power Politics and the New Internet Order
Re: [ifwp] Re: Preliminary report from Boston
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
RE: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
RE: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
RE: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: [ifwp] Re: Report From Monterrey (2nd DNSO Meeting)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Ripple
Re: [ifwp] Re: rumor: dnso.org and trademark community have cut a deal
Re: [ifwp] Re: rumor: dnso.org and trademark community have cut a deal
RE: [IFWP] Re: Singapore DNSO Meeting Schedule and Agenda - 2nd draft
[ifwp] RE: Some ideas about COMMON VALUES -- Re: Proposed DNSO bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: The DNSO is a special interest group now
Re: [IFWP] Re: the emperor's clothes
RE: [ifwp] Re: The IANA's File of iTLD Requests (Flashback)
Re: [ifwp] Re: The Non-Profit Issue Again
RE: [IFWP] Re: The People's Republic of ICANN?
Re: [ifwp] RE: time
Re: [IFWP] Re: Time out Re: ORSC Protest of NIST Solicitation No
Re: [IFWP] Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: [ifwp] Re: Unannounced, non-public meeting in Washington on , Jan. 21?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Unannounced, non-public meeting in Washington on Jan. 21?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: [IFWP] Re: voting
Re: [ifwp] Re: Voting mechanisms: The Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Fwd: Re: [IFWP] Re: What ICANN doesn't want you to know - awell hid
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
RE: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What's happening
Re: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to thediscuss list?
Re: [IFWP] Re: WIPO transcript posted.
Re: [IFWP] Revised bylaw Article VI-B (DNSO subject-matter
Re: [IFWP] Revised bylaw Article VI-B (DNSO subject-matter jurisdiction)
Re: [ifwp] Second response to:Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: [ifwp] Secrecy
Re: [IFWP] Slanders and impostures
Re: [IFWP] Slanders and impostures
Re: [IFWP] Slanders and impostures
Re: [IFWP] Slanders and impostures
Re: [ifwp] SO Formation/Selection Process
Re: [IFWP] The DNSO General Assembly
Re: [IFWP] the DNSO general assembly
Re: [ifwp] The DNSO is a special interest group now
Re: [IFWP] The Jeff Williams Report
Re: [IFWP] The Jeff Williams Report
RE: [ifwp] Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re
Re: [ifwp] Voting mechanisms: The Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: [ifwp] what ICANN is up to [re open Board meetings] ...
[kent@songbird.com: draft application]
Re: [Membership] ICANN: The Issue of Membership
RE: [Membership] Re: The People's Republic of ICANN?
RE: [Membership] The People's Republic of ICANN?
Re: [rcs] Opening Question
[TSWINEHART/0002131750@mcimail.com: Re: call in number -- IMPORTANT: Teleconf on Saturday 23]
About: [ifwp] RE: time
Re: Accreditation guidelines
Accreditation Guidelines for Registrars
Re: Addition of Joe Sims to Participants Mailing List
additional drafts for dnso
AIP Bylaws Draft
AIP DNSO Proposal
FW: AIP Survey - Official Update
Re: Amadeu's back
Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Bill of Rights (was [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Re: [ifwp] Re: Amendments to dnso.org and dnso.net bylaws
Amendments to Paris Draft
Re: Amendments to Paris Draft
Re: Amendments to Paris Draft
Re: Amendments to Paris Draft
Re: Amendments to Paris Draft
And now?
Re: And now?
RE: And now?
Re: And now?
ANN: PGP Keysigning Party - APRICOT99/ICANN/DNSO/AP*/SLC, Singapore, March 1-5 1999
Announcement
Announcement of New DNSO constituency for Individual DN owners
Another Internet Bubble Pops: Tuvalu's .TV Deal
Another month of debate is coming to a close....
Anti-competitive Tendencies? (Re: Flawed Drafts submitted to ICANN)
AP* is planning DNSO meetings in Singapore starting March 2
Re: AP* is planning DNSO meetings in Singapore starting March 2
Re: AP* is planning DNSO meetings in Singapore starting March 2
Re: AP* is planning DNSO meetings in Singapore starting March 2
Re: AP* is planning DNSO meetings in Singapore starting March 2
Re: AP* is planning DNSO meetings in Singapore starting March 2
Are you going to take people's domain names away from them?
ASO mailing list available and activated
Aspen Institute ICANN Review Panel Proposal
Attendance at the 22 January meeting
RE: Attendance at the 22 January meeting
RE: Attendance at the 22 January meeting
Attention ICANN :The IANA's File of iTLD Requests (Flashback)
Attention ICANN/Christopner Ambler: Sun wins injunction againstSun wins injunction against
Attention: Coupon fraud alert!
AW: Our draft
Berlin meeting
Berlin-Seattle
RE: Berlin-Seattle
RE: Berlin-Seattle
Re:Berlin-Seattle
Re:RE: Berlin-Seattle
RE: Berlin-Seattle
A big problem with the ISP constituency
Re: A big problem with the ISP constituency
Re: A big problem with the ISP constituency
A big Problem with the ISP constituency
Business Constituency
More Divisiveness to:Re: Business Constituency
Re: More Divisiveness to:Re: Business Constituency
Re: Business Constituency
Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [Enredo] Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [Enredo] Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: [IFWP] Re: Business Constituency
Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do wewant......?
California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: [IFWP] California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: California meeting March 18; was Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do wewant......?
Call for a higher standard.
Can we make one list for the dnso discussion?
Re: Can we make one list for the dnso discussion?
RE: ccTLD cliques (was: Draft New Draft)
RE: ccTLD cliques (was: Draft New Draft)
ccTLDs Call on ICANN to Maintain RFC 1591
CENTR - http://www.centr.org
CENTR comment on DNSO process
Change in discuss@dnso.org and participants@dnso.org
Re: Change in discuss@dnso.org and participants@dnso.org
Change to Proposal for a DNSO Membership Committee
Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Re: Chopped liver no more! Was Re: do we want......?
Closed January 21 Washington meeting
Re: Comment period closes at 4pm EST
Comment, and a Question for Interim Board to:[ifwp] Re: Sovereignty and ccTLDs
Comment-Draft
Commentary on ICC submission
Re: Comments on classless bylaws phase 2
comments on DNSO application
Comments on draft 7
Comments on Draft DNSO Amendment to ICANN Bylaws
Comments on ICC proposed changes
Comments on the INTA application for recognition as the DNSO
Comments on the INTA Proposal for a DNSO (Final Version)
Comments received, being published
FW: Comments recieved being published
Comments to the DNSO proposals
Re: committees
Comparison of DNSO Draft Proposals
Re: Consensus Call (was: Draft New Draft)
Constituencies
constituency acronyms
constituency formation
Constituency record-keeping
Fw: cr> DNRC WIPO Press Release
Death of a Registry
RE: Decision on "Paris" and "BMW" DNSO drafts
Definition (was Constituencies)
Did Cook really do his Homework before endorsing/defending Sondow? Where does Mr Sondow REALLY stand? Let his words speak for themself
DISBAND ICANN: ON TO THE WRAP-UP !!
Disclosure - Was: RE: DNSO worries
Disclosures: Was Re: DNS Lotto: Dead Man Walking
DNS configuration stats
DNS Lotto: Dead Man Walking
Re: DNSO
Re: DNSO - then what?
DNSO / Fluid Constituencies
DNSO / ICANN Funding Model Paper, Version 0.1
DNSO / Individual v. Corporate Voting
Re: DNSO and Democracy
DNSO app in text format
DNSO Application -- The Paris Draft
DNSO APPLICATION TIMETABLE
The DNSO Comedy, Part II
The DNSO Comedy, Part II (January 22nd)
DNSO Dilemma
DNSO does not represent ccTLDs
DNSO draft proposals compared
DNSO Important update: The "Merged" Draft
DNSO Intentions made clear
The DNSO is a special interest group now
DNSO Membership Committee Proposal (Amended)
DNSO MTY meeting Revised Agenda - Still a Draft -
DNSO Mty meeting: Holidex System reservations
DNSO process and Drafts submitted to ICANN
Re: DNSO process and Drafts submitted to ICANN
Re: DNSO process and Drafts submitted to ICANN
Re: DNSO process and Drafts submitted to ICANN
RE: DNSO process and Drafts submitted to ICANN
DNSO Report Card (www.dnso.org)
DNSO website update: New Draft & More
DNSO website updated (more comments)
DNSO website updates
Re: DNSO website updates
DNSO worries
DNSO's view of Registrar Accreditation Guidelines
DNSO-IP Constituency Proposal Comparison
dnso.org
DNSO.ORG application, an analysis
Re: DNSO.ORG Meeting proposal on Jan.23(for the last time)
DNSO.ORG Sleaze was[ifwp] Re: DNSO documents
RE: DNSO.ORG transition team
dnso.org Transition Team Teleconf, Jan 15 99
DNSO.ORG's deciion making process
Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Re: do we want to have constituency meetings in singapore next month?
Do you have one?
Docket No. 980212036-8172-03: U.S. Gov't Position on ccTLDs and national govern
Fw: Does no-one care?
Domain name glitch hits 10,000 names
RE: Domain name glitch hits 10,000 names
Domain Name Registration Proposals
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
DON'T DELETE THIS MESSAGE -- FOLDER INTERNAL DATA
RE: Don't Take Their Word For It!
Draft comparison
Draft comparisons
Draft New Draft
draft of 1/19
Re: Draft Poisson minutes
Draft Submission?
Re: Draft/No Draft
Re: easyDNS claims the following TLD's
Re: the emperor's clothes
Escape clause for friends of the Comintern
Esperanto
Re: Evidence of DNSO.ORG closed dealings?
Re: Exclusion of non-commercial Internet users from ICANN
explanation of geographical diversity election process
Fear and trembling at the ICC: the best defense is an offense.
Re: Fees, costs, and domain name prices
Fees, expenses and voting on fees
A few answers on ISO-3166...
Re: Flawed Drafts submitted to ICANN
Re: Follow on of: [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject: Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"
Follow up on my too vaugue request to Antony
Forwarded mail....
Free Non-Commercial Domain Names for U.S. Citizens.
Free Tip
A fresh approach to defining the DNSO
From Sandcastles to Santa to Skyscrapers
funding and fees
FYI - INEGRoup's submittel for protest of the NIST contract ti ICANN
FYI. From: Bill Howie, Subject: FICPI APAA DOMAIN NAME MEETING
FYI: Draftinc-C Announcement
FYI: ISP Constituency Formation
Getting Real
Re: a giant step for netkind, was Re: Common misconceptions
Good Berlin Website
Re: Good news
Re: grandfathering of .us domains?
Re: Green Question
Grey Ribbon Campaign calls for open ICANN board meetings
Re: gTLD registry constituency [from IFWP]
GVU's 10th WWW User Survey
Have people considered using the Internet to "organize" ?
Re: Have people considered using the Internet to "organize" ?
Have you ever considered doing anything else?
help with my FOIA
Hotel rates
Re: Hotel rates
Re: Hotel rates
Re: How do we want DNSO to be?
Re: How not to define membership classes
Re: How not to define membership classes
RE: How not to define membership classes
RE: How not to define membership classes
How this Relates to ICANN From: Privacy versus Security Paradox, was Re: what would be the expected role of an "abuse" contact?
I made it! [Was: RE: Proof! (fwd) [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject:Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"]
Re: [IFWP] I made it! [Was: RE: Proof! (fwd) [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject:Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"]
Re: [IFWP] I made it! [Was: RE: Proof! (fwd) [Advisory Notice fromIHOJ] Subject:Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"]
Re: The IANA's File of iTLD Requests (Flashback)
Re: ICANN & DNSO
Re: ICANN & DNSO
Re: ICANN & DNSO
ICANN & DNSO
RE: ICANN & DNSO
Re: ICANN & DNSO
Re: ICANN & Emphysema
ICANN - Membership Advisory Committee
ICANN .A-.Z: Market Structure Failure Monopolies & DNS Mathematics
ICANN Board resolutions, public and not so public
ICANN Dispatch from Singapore - 4 March 99
No Consensus for: Re: [IFWP] ICANN Dispatch from Singapore - 4 March 99
Re: ICANN language translation
Re: ICANN language translation
ICANN Berlin meeting Remote Simultaneous Translation Project
Re: ICANN language translation
Re: ICANN language translation
ICANN Mailing List
ICANN Meeting schedule - please announce as in advance as possible
ICANn meetings and reaching out.
Re: ICANN postings
ICANN Root Server and Governmental Committees?
Re: ICANN's Defective Competition Guidelines, etc (was Accreditationguidelines, etc.)
Re: ICANN's Defective Competition Guidelines, etc (was Accredita
ICANN's Defective Competition Guidelines, etc (was Accreditation guidelines, etc.)
Re: ICANN's Defective Competition Guidelines, etc (was Accreditation guidelines,etc.)
ICANN's Genetic Defect (was Re: Fees, costs, and domain name prices)
ICANN's Registrar Qualifications: Relevant to Alternative Economic Models????
Re: icc comments in text
icc comments on dnso draft
icc general principles for a dnso
Re: ICIIU and the NCDNHC effort
Re: IETF reserving domains
Re: If constituencies
ifwp list
Illegal Ricky Williams Tshirts?
Important Report
FW: IMPORTANT: Teleconf on Saturday 23
Impressions from Washington
Re: Impressions from Washington
RE: Impressions from Washington
RE: Incorporating DNSO?
RE: Incorporating DNSO?
Incorporation or not?
RE: Incorporation or not?
Re: Incorporation or not?
Re: Incorporation or not?
RE: Incorporation or not?
RE: Incorporation or not?
Re: the Individual Domain Name Owners constituency
Re: the Individual Domain Name Owners constituency
Re: the Individual Domain Name Owners constituency
Re: the Individual Domain Name Owners constituency
INEGroup Pre-Payment Poll No 1.
info on SGML editor
Int'l DN/TM dispute policies
INTA Application
Re: INTA Application
Interesting article on ICANN
Re: Interesting article on ICANN
RE: Interesting article on ICANN
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)
Internet Privacy trend and NSI-Whois/ICANN- Accreditation Guidelines?
Introduction
Invitation
Re: Invitation
Iperdome to Organize Netizens for Internet Governance
Re: ISOC
Re: ISOC -Reply
Fwd: Re: ISOC -Reply
Re: ISOC -Reply -Reply
Re: ISOC -Reply -Reply
ISOC support of DNSO.ORG Washington DC draft.
ISP Constituency DNSO
ISP Constituency Draft -New-
Re: It is likely to be illegal Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
It's http://www.c-change.net ! Sorry
It's up there(DNSO proposal)
Jan 21 "closed meeting" minutes, Part One
Jan 21 "closed" meeting minutes, Part Two
Jan 21 closed meeting agenda
Re: Jan. 23 Berkman Ctr workshop on ICANN membership issues
January 17th ICANN Teleconference
January 21/22 domain names meetings
January DNSO meeting for the trademark interests
Jeff Speaks
The Jeff Williams Report
Just a planning session
Just in case...
RE: JW fools another reporter! Wired quotes a fraud!
Kent Crispin's Forward of "News from the ORSC"
Latest M.A.C. Recommendations for the ICANN At-Large membership
re: latest MAC recommendations
Latest Trademark owner trying to abuse domain holders rights....
Little Local ISP's big corp Giant Killers?
Re: Littleton Colo. cyndrome? to:Re: Foreign Language Trademarks
Looks like the Proposal list is bogus[Fwd: Returned mail: User unknown]
Magaziner: EU wont drive U.S. Privacy Policy
Re: Mailing lists (last try)
meeting notes...
Merge draft
Re: merge5.txt
merged draft ?!?
Merry Christmas....
minimizing conflict
minimizing constituencies
A modest proposal - compare the proposals
Re: Modification of DNSO bylaws: Membership
Monterrey, Mexico meeting
More Cyberspace Trademark Litigation in the news.....
Re: More Domain Follies?
More on Rushworth Kidder's writings (RE Global Common Values)
More Questions while waiting for Esther Dyson's Answer...
More reveling evidance of ICANN's "Test Bed" selections
Re: My app declined
The Natural Life Cycle of Mailing Lists
NC Size [Was: Re: Monterrey Report]
NCDNHC Comparison
Network Solutions & InterNIC discussion list
Network Solutions' Robert J. Korzeniewski Named CFO of the Year
FW: Network Solutions' TLD Zone File Access Program
New application draft on the web
New draft
new math
New privacy bill in the offing?
New York Times article on ccTLDs/IATLD
News from the ORSC
No Need For "At Large" DNSO membership (Was: Re: "constitutional protections")
No Subject
Re: Note to Esther, was (Re: [IFWP] Re: ICANN and WIPO in Berlin)
NSI and Ivan Pope: some disclosure
NSI continues clampdown on information
NSI Domain Name Dispute Stats
Re: NSI payments Adam Todd and Richard Sexton
NSI Registration Problems persist
The NSI SRS technical test team - what happened?
NSI teams with Centraal on web names
NSI's DNSO Position
Objections to a flat structure ( was :Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Objections to a flat structure
Re: [ifwp] Re: Objections to a flat structure
Re: [ifwp] Re: Objections to a flat structure ( was :Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?)
Re: [ifwp] Re: Objections to a flat structure ( was :Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?)
OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
Re: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
RE: OFF TOPIC - East Timor ccTLD servers attacked
Online Democracy
online processes for the dnso
Re: online processes for the dnso
Re: online processes for the dnso
RE: online processes for the dnso
Re: online processes for the dnso
Onward
Re: Onward
Re: Onward
Re: Onward
Onward + RFC-1591
Open and Transparent Democracy
Re: open Washington meeting?
Fwd: The ORSC Delta
Re: ORSC's proxy system
Other constituencies in formation to: Re: [IFWP] Re: Unrepresented constituencies
Re: Our draft
Our Thanks and gratitude & Report
RE: PAB [kent@songbird.com: Onward]
Re: PAB comments on DNSO application
Re: PAB Re: Press Release: Governments Endorse Private Sector Internet
Paris Draft
RE: Paris Draft Site Up with Full Draft Text
Paris draft?
Re: Paris Meeting
participants@dnso.org
The People's Republic of ICANN?
Perminant DOmain Names? Was:[ifwp] Re: Who is on the list
Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
Re: Perplexed in the Face of Anger, Acrimony & ~Evidence
Physical locations and meeting proximity.
plans for trademark constituency
Play it again Sam.
Re: Please end this nonsens.
Population and governance.
Practical info - Washington meeting
preparing the singapore dnso meeting agenda now
Press Release: Governments Endorse Private Sector Internet
Re: Press Release: Governments Endorse Private SectorInternet
Press Release: ICANN Releases Draft Accreditation Guidelines
PRESS RELEASE: THE INTERNET CORPORATION FOR ASSIGNED NAMES AND NUMBERS (ICANN) CONVENES PUBLIC OPEN MEETINGS IN BERLIN
Process for Joint merged draft
Professor Criticizes WIPO Domain Proposal
Proof! (fwd) [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject: Unsavory Individules "NetKooks"
Re: Proof! (fwd) [Advisory Notice from IHOJ] Subject:UnsavoryIndividules "NetKooks"
Proposal for a DNSO Membership Committee (Re: Comments on Draft 7)
Proposal for a method of accrediting new registrars
Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
Proposal to ICANN by Internet.A-.Z Name Registry to Creating Competition to theMonolithic NSI-Registrar Economic System by Utilizing the DNS Design toIncrease SLD.TLD Name Inventory
Re: Proposed California meeting
Re: Proposed DNSO bylaws
Re: Proposed Objectives
public apology
Re: public apology
Quality Control
Re: Quality Control
Query.This:DNS.Net.Art for the enlightened
RE: [IFWP] Query.This:DNS.Net.Art for the enlightened
Re: [IFWP] Query.This:DNS.Net.Art for the enlightened
Question for Esther: What is the Role of the GAC? (Government Advisory Committee)
Re: Question for Esther: What is the Role of the GAC? (Government Advisory Committee)
RE: Question for Esther: What is the Role of the GAC? (Government Advisory Committee)
Re: Questions regarding Anti-competitive Elements of the Paris Draft andDNSO.ORG Drafts
Questions regarding Anti-competitive Elements of the Paris Draft and DNSO.ORGDrafts
Re: Questions regarding Anti-competitive Elements of the Paris Draft and DNSO.ORG Drafts
Re: Quick Take on "closed" meeting
RE: [Enredo] Re: Quick Take on "closed" meeting
Re: Reflections on Singapore
Re: Register fee set, DoC/NSI agree
RE: Registrar Accreditation Update
Registrar accreditation, WIPO, and the end of freedom.
RE: Registrar accreditation, WIPO, and the end of freedom.
A Registrar Constituency for the ICANN DNSO
Re: A Registrar Constituency for the ICANN DNSO
Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
voting
Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Registrars Constituency of the DNSO
Registrr Constituency
Re: Removal of ICANN Board Members Appointed by DNSO
Reply to Hurtado
Re: Reply to Hurtado
reply to Schneider
Re: reply to Schneider
Report from Singapore
Re: Report from Singapore
A Right to Privacy
rumor: dnso.org and trademark community have cut a deal
Re: Rumors
Scraps
Second Response to:[ifwp] Polling [was IFWP Mailing List]
RE: Selective Censorship perhaps on discuss@dnso.org? was:Re: [IFWP] Re: Registrar Constituency meeting - Berlin
Singapore DNSO Meeting - final announcement
singapore dnso meeting participants list
Singapore DNSO Meeting Schedule and Agenda - 2nd draft
Re: SO note
SO note (fwd)
Re: Fw: SO structure - private
Re: So.. that's it?
SOCIAL STRUCTURE
Some ideas about COMMON VALUES -- Re: Proposed DNSO bylaws
Some Policy Choices Must Be Made Now (Was:Re: Draft New Draft)
Some recent DNSO-related meetings
sovereignty meaning attached to domain names
Special Message concerning remote participation in Singapore (fwd)
Stakeholders ignored in SIngapore DNSO meeting DNSO King Roberts Dictates
Stef's 10 constituency DNSO proposal
Stef's FHP response to:[ifwp] Re: Proposal for a new ORSC/DNSO project
subscribe
subscribe
subscribe
Re: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
Re: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
Re: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
Re: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
RE: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
RE: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
RE: Summary of discuss list 12/15/98 - 1/5/99 for drafting team
Re: Support for Paris draft
Taxes and the Internet
tentative financial summary of DNSO and APTLD Meetings last week
test
Test message please ignor
Test to discuss
Re: Test to participants
Test, please ignore
Test_discuss
Re: Text Version of Draft AIP Documents
Thank you
Thank you, Kilnam
Third Response to:[ifwp] Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: This Constituency
Re: This Week's Reality check
Ticker symbol NSOL
time
Re: [ifwp] RE: time
Re: TLD with Entrance Criteria, then? (LONG!)
TLD's
TLDs are TLDs...remember when Postel added .IO ?
Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply
RE: Trademarks vs DNS
RE: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply
RE: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply -Reply
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply -Reply
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply -Reply
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply -Reply -Reply
Re: Trademarks vs DNS -Reply -Reply
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
Re: Trademarks vs DNS
RE: Trademarks vs DNS
U.S. Government Operatives Do Not Write Code
ulterior messages
Re: ulterior messages
Re: ulterior messages
Re: ulterior messages
Re: ulterior messages
Unannounced, non-public meeting in Washington on Jan. 21?
Re: Unannounced, non-public meeting in Washington on Jan. 21?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Ripple
Re: [ifwp] Re: Ripple
Re: [ifwp] Re: Ripple
Re: Unannounced, non-public meeting in Washington on January 21st?
Unity is Strength
UPDATED - DNSO Formation Consultation Meeting - Monterrey
Re: UPDATED - DNSO Formation Consultation Meeting - Monterrey
updated constituencies
Re: updated constituencies
RE: updated constituencies
RE: updated constituencies -Reply
RE: updated constituencies -Reply
RE: updated constituencies -Reply -Reply
RE: updated constituencies -Reply -Reply
Re: updated constituencies -Reply -Reply
Re: updated constituencies -Reply -Reply
Useless list
Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
Re: Users need to be able to speak for themselves(Was: Re:Position of SOs)
RE: voting
Re: voting
Re: voting
Re: voting
Re: voting
RE: voting
Re: voting
Re: [IFWP] RE: voting
Re: voting
Re: voting
Re: voting
Re: voting
Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Re: Voting mechanisms: the Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
Voting mechanisms: The Amer. Arbit. Assoc.
vPC + C+@ + IPv8 + 2,048 TLDs...this network solution is simple...
WASH DC MEET - Unofficial FAQ
Wash DC Meeting Invitation Letter on the website
Re: Wash DC Meeting Invitation Letter on the website
Washington DC Meeting & DNSO Process
Re: Washington DC Meeting & DNSO Process
Re: Washington DC Meeting & DNSO Process
Re: Washington DC Meeting & DNSO Process
Re: Washington DC Meeting & DNSO Process
Re: WEB.EDU registered by non university?
Welcome, and Some pointers
RE: what ICANN is up to
RE: what ICANN is up to
Re: what ICANN is up to
FW: what ICANN is up to: the financial arrangements for paying IANA salaries; why the NIST solicitation for ICANN contracts is illegal and can be stopped with an ORSC protest letter; why its a waste of board member's ti
Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: [ifwp] Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
RE: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
Re: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
RE: What is this? Why are we surprised with it?
What's happening
Re: What's happening
Re: What's happening
Re: What's happening
When lawyers break the law...
RE: list When lawyers break the law...
When the NC must act - a target to shoot at
Re: When the NC must act - a target to shoot at
When's Payback Time? (was Is ICANN Bankrupt?)
Where does Jun Murai post on the Internet ?
which proposals?
Who are these people ?
Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
Re: Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
Re: Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
Re: Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
Re: Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
RE: Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
RE: Who in ISOC supports the DNSO.ORG Draft? (was Re: Whos is on that draft)
Who is "we" that are pleased ?
Who is it that needs trademark protection?
Re: [ifwp] RE: Who is it that needs trademark protection?
Whos is on that draft
Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss
Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
RE: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
Re: [ifwp] Re: Why was Draft 7 of the application not posted to the discuss list?
WIPO considered harmful
WIpo to the rescue? to:Re: [ifwp] WIPO to the Rescue(NOT!)
WIPO's Domain Dispute policy pushed forward, blasted at Berlin ICANN Conference!
Wired - ICANN to Unveil New Rules
WIRED Article on Singapore Meeting
WIRED Article: Israeli ccTLD policy
Wired reports a balanced view To: Re: [IFWP] WiReD Falls Victum To Hoax: Goes Ballistic!
The WWW boy (William Whalsh the Whiner) back to his old Games again to:Re: Credibility in the process and One Man ne Congress WAS: Re: [IFWP] gTLD constituency
Re: The WWW boy (William Whalsh the Whiner) back to his old Games again to:Re: Credibility in the process and One Man ne Congress WAS: Re: [IFWP] gTLD constituency
xmas
The Y1C problem
Yes, we can reach an agreement. Let's meet in Singapore.
RE: Yes, we can reach an agreement. Let's meet in Singapore.
Re: Yet another John Charles Broomfield? How many are there? Re: jbroom@MANTA.OUTREMER.COM,
Re: Yet another John Charles Broomfield? How many are there? Re: jbroom@MANTA.OUTREMER.COM,
Re: Yet another John Charles Broomfield? How many are there? Re: jbroom@MANTA.OUTREMER.COM,
Your call for input

[Author Index Start]	[Subject Index Start]	[Date Index Start]
[Author Directory]	[Subject Directory]	[Date Directory]