Hello Alan,
Thanks for sharing this which is good. A few minor editorials and comment:
1. "“that it would be difficult to argue that *that* processing to prevent DNS...."
2 "...Phase 2 will *be* address the deferred issues as..."
3. I am not sure why we say "we do not accept" certain issues yet we seem to end our statement by accepting the report. Since/if we have red-lines then we should clearly not accept the report as a whole. However if we can live with the report as indicated in the last paragraph then I suggest we modify the following:
"To be specific, the results which we cannot accept are:...." So it doesn't contradict the acceptance stated in the last paragraph.
That said, I agree with Gorge, that the element of choice/consent is being taken away from registrants in terms of what they want to provide and publish.
It's election period in my country, my apologies as I won't be present at upcoming cpwg call
Regards
Sent from my mobile
Kindly excuse brevity and typos