Those are not "oppositions" to the OPoC they are implementation details
that the new WG is supposed to clear up. 

>>> Mawaki Chango <[log in to unmask]> 4/12/2007 7:37 AM >>>
FYI

--- Bruce Tonkin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Subject: [council] Summary of opposition to the WHOIS task
> force recommendation
> Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 16:10:57 +1000
> From: "Bruce Tonkin" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: "Council GNSO" <[log in to unmask]>
> 
> Hello All,
> 
> Here is a summary of the opposition to the WHOIS task force
> recommendation as discussed in Lisbon and presented at various
> forums:
> 
> - Unclear on the scope responsibilities of the operational
> contact
> 
> - No job description for operational contact
> 
> - no timeframes by when the operational contact must respond
> 
> - What happens if OPOC fails to meet responsibilities
> 
> - Circumstances where admin and tech and full registrant
> information
> held by the registrar would be provided, and no standard way 
> to access 
> 
> - Need more accurate admin and tech and full registrant
> information
> 
> Regards,
> Bruce Tonkin
> 
> 
> 
>