On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 03:00:05PM +0200, Wilfried Woeber, UniVie/ACOnet wrote:
Please feel free to propose additional topics by either replying to the WG mailing list or in private mail to Nigel (who has volunteered to manage the meeting in Manchester - thank you very much!) and myself.
Hate to come up with it again, but there are various actions points open on the abuse-c stuff. One of them lists the 'implement whatever concensus there is on the mailinglist'. These should already be on the agenda as open action points, but it might be worth planning some time for discussion or at least an overview of what the outcome of the mail discussion was. I can find back 2 detailed proposals on this subject: From: Shane Kerr <shane@ripe.net> Subject: Re: [db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 14:57:44 +0200 Message-ID: <409F7C48.8070205@ripe.net> From: Ulrich Kiermayr <ulrich.kiermayr@univie.ac.at> Subject: [db-wg] Proposal: Abuse-C as a Reference Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 10:25:12 +0200 Message-ID: <4099F668.1040508@univie.ac.at> The one from Ulrich, on abuse-c reference, met some more 'resistance' as Shane's proposal on cutting the number of email addresses returned. But they are also taking a very different approach to solve the problem. It's hard to say there is consensus on this subject, although in they end there weren't much comments posted and everybody seems to be happy (or tired of it). Grtx, MarcoH