DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

RE: [nc-whois] DRAFT: Recommendations.

Two additional comments:

(1) On point 2, the issue of a centralized access portal to Whois data
across registries seems to have slipped away. Since there was strong support
for this change it ought to be mentioned.  It could be discussed separately
from both uniform data format and uniform data elements.  

(2)  Upon review of point 4 I have no specific disagreement but I wonder
whether we should be getting into such detail as to propose specific wording
changes to the RAA. 

Thanks again to Thomas.  I assume we will discuss these on today's
conference call.

Steve Metalitz  

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Metalitz [mailto:metalitz@iipa.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 5:23 PM
To: 'nc-whois@dnso.org'
Subject: FW: [nc-whois] DRAFT: Recommendations.

Thank you, Thomas, for getting the ball rolling on these.  You have raised a
number of new issues which deserve careful examination.  Please see my
suggestions attached for changes (in redline format).  I may have some
additional suggestions prior to our conference call on Tuesday.    

Steve Metalitz 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Roessler [mailto:roessler@does-not-exist.org]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2002 8:02 PM
To: nc-whois@dnso.org
Subject: [nc-whois] DRAFT: Recommendations.

Please find attached a possible draft for recommendations this Task  
Force may make (partially, but not exclusively, based on the 
survey).  Please consider this as discussion fodder, and treat it 

Thanks, and kind regards,
Thomas Roessler                        <roessler@does-not-exist.org>

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>