>Adam Peake wrote: > >>There will be another workshop in Whois at Carthage and I think >>that's the most important issue on ICANN's agenda at the moment. >>Perhaps a good idea to support a second Whois/privacy expert >>(Stephanie Perrin, if she's able to attend, or is not anyway >>attending on EPIC's behalf, or Alan Davidson, CDT) or someone from >>Europe who could provide comment on issues beyond the US/N. American >>view. > >Adam, I am quite surprised by your "racist" comment. >You sound only US/N or Europe can have some views on Whois. e.g. <http://lyris.tucows.com:8080/read/messages?id=180863> European experience seems it may be helpful in some ways to our arguments (I am *not* suggesting NCUC/EPIC would pay for Moers.) >Definitely many other parts of the world do care the issue. As we saw AUDA, >whether we believe or not it is Asia Pacific region instead of >Europe or NA, they do >care. Irony? Thanks, Adam >And recently, according to Sept. 22 news, KISA(Korea Information Secuirty >Agency) also announced some recommendations on Whois. You can see from the >following url. > >http://security.inews24.com/php/news_view.php?g_menu=080200&g_serial=99203 >(in Korean) > >It emphasizes domain registrars should give the registrants options not to >disclose their whois. When the registrars disclose the whois after agreement >from the registrant, it should be notified to the registrants in advance. > >>No detailed agenda from ICANN. Hard to know what additional >>expertise might be required. This has always been a problem of >>trying to target funds for attendance at ICANN meetings. > >One of agenda many of you don't care as native speakers of English could be >IDN(Multilingual Domain Issues). The issue has been silently discussed and >presented as a conclusion. It is another frustration to those who are going to >be affected by the decision as users. > >Hope you can explain what you said. >YJ --