16:53:42 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #dnt
16:53:42 <RRSAgent> logging to http://www.w3.org/2013/02/06-dnt-irc
16:53:49 <npdoty> Zakim, this is 87225
16:53:50 <Zakim> ok, npdoty; that matches T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
16:53:55 <npdoty> Zakim, who is on the phone?
16:53:56 <Zakim> On the phone I see +1.646.654.aaaa
16:55:03 <aleecia> aleecia has joined #dnt
16:55:28 <dwainberg> dwainberg has joined #dnt
16:55:50 <Zakim> +Aleecia
16:56:00 <aleecia> agenda?
16:56:07 <rvaneijk> rvaneijk has joined #dnt
16:56:19 <jeffwilson> jeffwilson has joined #dnt
16:56:38 <eberkower> Zakim 646 654 is eberkower
16:56:39 <Zakim> +??P46
16:56:47 <Zakim> -??P46
16:56:52 <Zakim> +rvaneijk
16:56:59 <npdoty> Zakim, aaaa is eberkower
16:56:59 <Zakim> +eberkower; got it
16:57:00 <eberkower> zakim, 646.654.aaaa is eberkwer
16:57:01 <Zakim> sorry, eberkower, I do not recognize a party named '646.654.aaaa'
16:57:09 <dsinger__> dsinger__ has joined #dnt
16:57:20 <aleecia> zakim, aaaa is eberkower
16:57:20 <Zakim> sorry, aleecia, I do not recognize a party named 'aaaa'
16:57:33 <aleecia> ...?
16:57:37 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
16:57:39 <moneill2> zakim, [IPCaller] is me
16:57:39 <Zakim> +moneill2; got it
16:57:45 <Zakim> + +1.703.861.aabb
16:57:57 <jeffwilson> zakim, aabb is jeffwilson
16:57:57 <Zakim> +jeffwilson; got it
16:58:01 <Zakim> +dsinger
16:58:03 <dsinger__> dsinger__ has joined #dnt
16:58:19 <Yianni> Yianni has joined #DNT
16:58:19 <peterswire> peterswire has joined #dnt
16:58:38 <JC> JC has joined #DNT
16:58:55 <Zakim> +dwainberg
16:59:03 <Zakim> +npdoty
16:59:10 <dsinger__> zakim, who is on the phone?
16:59:10 <Zakim> On the phone I see eberkower, Aleecia, rvaneijk, moneill2, jeffwilson, dsinger, dwainberg, npdoty
16:59:12 <Zakim> +yianni
16:59:13 <aleecia> :-( I'll be doing the transit run soon too (why I type more than talk now) but I'm sorry to hear your voice is gone, David
16:59:19 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
16:59:20 <Zakim> +[Microsoft]
16:59:29 <Zakim> +Peter_Swire
16:59:32 <Zakim> + +1.919.388.aacc - is perhaps AnnaLong?
16:59:52 <AnnaLong> AnnaLong has joined #dnt
17:00:03 <Wileys> Wileys has joined #DNT
17:00:18 <felixwu> felixwu has joined #dnt
17:00:27 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
17:00:34 <jchester2> jchester2 has joined #dnt
17:00:34 <hefferjr> hefferjr has joined #dnt
17:00:37 <peterswire> nick: i'm 404.385.3279
17:00:41 <vincent> vincent has joined #dnt
17:00:41 <Zakim> + +1.212.571.aadd
17:00:47 <Zakim> +Keith_Scarborough
17:00:50 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has joined #dnt
17:00:50 <Walter> zakim, ipcaller is Walter
17:00:51 <Zakim> +Walter; got it
17:00:56 <justin_> justin_ has joined #dnt
17:01:01 <vinay> vinay has joined #dnt
17:01:01 <jmayer> jmayer has joined #dnt
17:01:04 <robsherman> robsherman has joined #dnt
17:01:09 <Walter> Somebody appears to be on a train?
17:01:13 <Wileys> zakim, aadd is WileyS
17:01:16 <Zakim> +WileyS; got it
17:01:16 <Zakim> +vincent
17:01:20 <Peter-4As> Peter-4As has joined #dnt
17:01:25 <Zakim> +[CDT]
17:01:28 <peterswire> volunteer to scribe?
17:01:32 <kulick> kulick has joined #dnt
17:01:35 <Zakim> +vinay
17:01:55 <Zakim> + +44.772.301.aaee
17:01:56 <Zakim> + +1.310.292.aaff
17:01:59 <Zakim> +Jonathan_Mayer
17:02:06 <Yianni> scribe: yianni
17:02:12 <phildpearce> phildpearce has joined #dnt
17:02:14 <npdoty> scribenick: Yianni
17:02:14 <bryan> bryan has joined #dnt
17:02:15 <Yianni> Peter: George Ivy on the phone
17:02:21 <npdoty> s/Ivy/Ivie/
17:02:23 <Zakim> +hefferjr
17:02:30 <Yianni> ...Peter is contacting by email
17:02:36 <johnsimpson> zakim, aaff is johnsimpson
17:02:36 <Zakim> +johnsimpson; got it
17:02:43 <Zakim> +[Microsoft.a]
17:02:50 <johnsimpson> zakim, mute me
17:02:50 <Zakim> johnsimpson should now be muted
17:02:50 <adrianba> zakim, [Microsoft.a] is me
17:02:51 <Yianni> Zakim, mute Yianni
17:02:51 <Zakim> +adrianba; got it
17:02:53 <Zakim> yianni should now be muted
17:02:56 <Zakim> + +1.202.331.aagg
17:03:04 <adrianba> zakim, mute me
17:03:04 <Zakim> adrianba should now be muted
17:03:06 <Keith> Keith has joined #dnt
17:03:07 <sidstamm> sidstamm has joined #dnt
17:03:11 <johnsimpson> yes
17:03:12 <Yianni> Peter: preview for Boston face to face
17:03:15 <Zakim> +bryan
17:03:19 <Zakim> + +1.212.972.aahh
17:03:24 <Zakim> +Peder_Magee
17:03:25 <Zakim> + +1.650.391.aaii
17:03:37 <Yianni> ...there are URLs and slides sent around for second portion of today's call
17:03:46 <Yianni> ...some of that exceeded the size limits
17:03:50 <Zakim> +[Mozilla]
17:03:53 <sidstamm> Zakim, Mozilla has sidstamm
17:03:53 <Zakim> +sidstamm; got it
17:03:59 <Yianni> ...Nick put into IRC, put in the URLs for second half of today
17:04:09 <npdoty> slides for homomorphic: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/homomorphic.dnt.pdf
17:04:10 <justin_> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/homomorphic.dnt.pdf
17:04:19 <susanisrael> susanisrael has joined #dnt
17:04:19 <Yianni> ...In terms of Boston, send some URLS for things are useful
17:04:23 <Zakim> +SusanIsrael
17:04:24 <hwest> hwest has joined #dnt
17:04:27 <npdoty> measuring ad effectiveness, from FPF: http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/measuring.fpf.docx
17:04:27 <yrlesru> yrlesru has joined #DNT
17:04:30 <robsherman> zakim, aiii is robsherman
17:04:30 <Zakim> sorry, robsherman, I do not recognize a party named 'aiii'
17:04:39 <Yianni> ...for agenda will add more: Monday uses, Tuesday de-identification
17:04:50 <Zakim> +hwest
17:04:56 <justin_> zakim, aaii is robsherman
17:04:56 <Zakim> +robsherman; got it
17:05:17 <Yianni> ...Editors, Yianni, W3C staff followed his advice to get to normative language
17:05:18 <npdoty> Zakim, aahh is George_Ivie
17:05:18 <Zakim> +George_Ivie; got it
17:05:31 <Yianni> ...focus is on bare bones, what is actually called for in the spec
17:05:41 <Zakim> + +1.503.264.aajj
17:05:42 <Yianni> ...what are remaining issues to get to last call
17:05:51 <bryan> where is barebones spec?
17:05:51 <schunter> Zakim, aajj is schunter
17:05:51 <Zakim> +schunter; got it
17:05:59 <Yianni> ...please review other language to figure out how to assign action items
17:06:02 <George> George has joined #dnt
17:06:10 <Zakim> + +1.202.835.aakk
17:06:14 <Yianni> ...list of 48 people of knowledge of coming
17:06:22 <Yianni> ...contact Nick if you are not on the list
17:06:24 <Brooks> Brooks has joined #dnt
17:06:25 <Marc_> Marc_ has joined #DNT
17:06:26 <Zakim> +Brooks
17:06:33 <Yianni> ...if you have topics to raise, the chair will consider
17:06:41 <justin_> The stripped down compliance spec (Bare Bones) is here:  http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/CambridgeBareBones.html
17:06:46 <Yianni> ...if you have language for barebones, get that to Heather and Justin
17:06:48 <Marc_> ((202) 835-9810 - Marc
17:06:50 <bryan> thx
17:06:54 <Yianni> ...question or comments on Boston?
17:06:56 <peterswire> q?
17:06:57 <aleecia> q+
17:07:11 <Chapell> Chapell has joined #DNT
17:07:11 <ninjamarnau> ninjamarnau has joined #dnt
17:07:15 <npdoty> Zakim, aakk is Marc_
17:07:15 <Zakim> +Marc_; got it
17:07:20 <kj> kj has joined #dnt
17:07:25 <dsinger> dsinger has joined #dnt
17:07:32 <Yianni> Aleecia: make sure that others are aware that a blizzard is supposed to hit on Friday night and Saturday
17:07:40 <Yianni> ...she is now cancelling trip
17:07:46 <Zakim> +ninjamarnau
17:07:53 <Zakim> +[Apple]
17:07:56 <Yianni> ...cannot afford to get stuck in Chicago and Boston
17:07:58 <Zakim> -dsinger
17:08:08 <justin_> Boston is good at dealing with snow.  Hopefully everything will be close to normal by Sunday.
17:08:09 <Yianni> Peter: will circulate weather to the list
17:08:11 <dsinger> zakim, [apple] has dsinger
17:08:11 <Zakim> +dsinger; got it
17:08:22 <eberkower> eberkower has joined #dnt
17:08:22 <Zakim> + +1.646.666.aall
17:08:33 <Yianni> Peter: Is George Ivie on the phone
17:08:47 <npdoty> Topic: Media Ratings Council
17:08:50 <susanisrael> my understanding of weather prediction in ne was less clearcut as of this morning.  There will be some kind of bad weather in ne but they weren't sure how bad it would be.
17:08:51 <Yianni> ...we are now going to hear from George
17:09:08 <Yianni> George: wanted to explain the role and process of Media Ratings Council
17:09:18 <Yianni> ...prepared a brief slide deck to guide through discussion
17:09:23 <Yianni> ...background of organization
17:09:29 <aleecia> Susan that's what's frustrating - this could all be fine. But if I'm going to get hotel & airfare back, I need to act today on the best info I have. Grrrr.
17:09:30 <Yianni> ...intersection of MRC and privacy
17:09:36 <hwest> susanisrael, what I'm hearing is that the most reliable model says that it'll be very bad in Boston, but other models are not in agreement - I imagine it'll be a game time decision for a lot of us
17:09:43 <aleecia> was planning to fly out on saturday
17:09:53 <bryan> which deck are we looking at?
17:09:57 <Yianni> ...help illustrate better the kinds of this they do to fulfill there function
17:10:00 <Yianni> ...going into slides
17:10:07 <aleecia> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/homomorphic.dnt.pdf
17:10:08 <peterswire> Media Rating Council, George Ivie, on list today
17:10:11 <Zakim> +BerinSzoka
17:10:19 <Yianni> ...slide 3, histry of MRC
17:10:23 <peterswire> the homomorphic URL is scheduled for about 12:45
17:10:29 <npdoty> direct link to George's slides: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Feb/att-0012/MRC_Background_--_W3C_and_DNT_1_.pdf
17:10:31 <susanisrael> hwest, you're probably better informed re boston.  I was listening to ny area radio this morning.  Weather will be friday night into saturday. I'm planning to take the train.
17:10:37 <Zakim> + +1.613.797.aamm
17:10:49 <BerinSzoka> BerinSzoka has joined #DNT
17:10:56 <Yianni> ...people claimed to manipulate audience resource and got congress' attention
17:10:58 <BerinSzoka> that was me just joining
17:11:05 <Yianni> ...looked into how media was measured in United States
17:11:36 <Yianni> ...help set advertising rates in program, big input on how content flows to the public
17:11:56 <Yianni> ...nexus because broadcast media was licensed for public, wanted fairness in ratings
17:12:13 <Yianni> ...hearings lasted 6 years, and government concluded that there should be regulation on how media is measured
17:12:25 <Yianni> ...make sure how content flows is based on real measurements
17:12:38 <Yianni> ...government recommended system of self regulation
17:12:47 <Yianni> ...dealt with broadcast radio
17:13:00 <Yianni> ...now media because scope has grown
17:13:27 <Yianni> ...administrate a voluntary process for measurement to get accredited
17:13:44 <Yianni> ...organization must agree to five sub bullets on page 3
17:14:28 <Yianni> ...Pay MRC for cost of audits, conducted by independent CPA form, MRC does not make money on audit
17:14:42 <Yianni> ...process is confidential, audit does not go to the public
17:14:51 <Yianni> ...work with members to ensure quality measurement
17:14:57 <Yianni> ...public only sees seal of approval
17:15:08 <Yianni> ...Slide 4, mission statement
17:15:09 <Zakim> +??P66
17:15:15 <Zakim> -rvaneijk
17:15:17 <Yianni> ...unaltered since 1960s
17:15:23 <Chris_IAB> Chris Mejia of IAB just joined via blocked number
17:15:25 <aleecia> negative indicators -> useless. but the audit financial structure is cool
17:15:33 <npdoty> Zakim, ??P66 is Chris_IAB
17:15:33 <Zakim> +Chris_IAB; got it
17:15:42 <magee2023263538> magee2023263538 has joined #dnt
17:15:46 <Yianni> ...Bottom of slide is the seal that organization can use when they meet the standard
17:16:04 <Yianni> ...Slide 5, list of member organizations
17:16:12 <Zakim> +rvaneijk
17:16:16 <Yianni> ...145 members of MRC (as big as they have ever been)
17:16:22 <Chris_IAB> sorry for joining late - where is deck?
17:16:29 <Yianni> ...they represent all facets of media business that rely of quality of media measurement
17:16:34 <peterswire> MRC deck circulated in mailing list today from swire
17:16:37 <justin_> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2013Feb/att-0012/MRC_Background_--_W3C_and_DNT_1_.pdf
17:16:56 <Yianni> ...companies they audit like Neilson or allbritton, cannot be members, they essentially regulate
17:17:08 <Yianni> ...slide 6, types of measurement products they audit
17:17:24 <Yianni> ...Allbritton on the list, a measurer of radio
17:17:49 <Yianni> ...television, radio, print, interenet, outdoor are all a part
17:18:04 <Yianni> ...on the left, have been approve and have the seal
17:18:15 <Yianni> ...on the right, still going through all the standards to acheive the seal
17:18:25 <Chris_IAB> thanks justin_ !
17:18:32 <Yianni> ...slide 7, how MRC interacts with privacy
17:18:39 <Chapell> zakim, aall is chapell
17:18:39 <Zakim> +chapell; got it
17:19:08 <Yianni> ...Neilson recruits households to instal meters on households, they accumulate data, and they produce television ratings
17:19:17 <Yianni> ...all of those homes have opted-in
17:19:27 <Zakim> +jchester2
17:19:34 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
17:19:34 <Zakim> jchester2 should now be muted
17:19:34 <Yianni> ...MRI, Allbritton, it happens in all companies that they have audited
17:19:55 <Yianni> ...in the internet realm, you still have legacy (metered, opt-in process), but also have more passive ways to track
17:20:06 <Yianni> ...track by using a cookie, what ads people are exposed to
17:20:17 <Yianni> ...MRC is not a privacy policy organization
17:20:30 <Yianni> ...standards of MRC do not talk about standards of privacy, not experts in that
17:20:49 <Yianni> ...we do not set privacy focused standards
17:21:00 <Yianni> ...audits mandate some form of retention of data, not driven by privacy
17:21:05 <Zakim> +David_MacMillan
17:21:11 <Yianni> ...driven by users of data being informed when errors are made
17:21:32 <jchester2> We should discuss the cross-platform assessment of users, such as via: http://www.measurementnow.net/support-the-mrc.html
17:21:34 <Zakim> +??P17
17:21:36 <David_MacMillan> David_MacMillan has joined #dnt
17:21:39 <Yianni> ...standards require that if you make mistakes, you need to reformulate data, so data must be retained
17:21:40 <justin_> How long?
17:21:48 <Yianni> ...some companies say they cannot retain data for privacy purposes
17:21:53 <yrlesru> yrlesru has joined #DNT
17:22:04 <Yianni> ...good example is click, if MRC says data must be retained for a year
17:22:23 <Yianni> ...if company says we cannot retain it at all, MRC says you do not have to retain if they have a legitimate reason
17:22:30 <aleecia> That's cool
17:22:33 <laurengelman> laurengelman has joined #dnt
17:22:36 <Yianni> ...do not need to retain data that puts you at privacy difficulties
17:22:39 <Zakim> +??P19
17:22:40 <justin_> Privacy policy > MRC retention standards.
17:22:44 <jchester2> The MRC system needs to be evaluated in terms of the data collection practices of the digital marketing industry.
17:22:50 <aleecia> So auditors do not require any retention period longer than the org has
17:22:53 <Yianni> ...consider organization privacy policies more important than MRC standards
17:23:06 <Yianni> ...general want retention of measurement data for 1 year
17:23:13 <laurengelman> Zakim, ??P19 is laurengelman
17:23:13 <Zakim> +laurengelman; got it
17:23:15 <Yianni> ...MRC is about quality of measurement, not privacy
17:23:30 <Yianni> ...slide 8, types of things MRC deals with
17:23:41 <Yianni> ...cell phones versus land line phones, how do you sample
17:23:44 <jmayer> Some time ago we debated whether MRC mandates data collection and retention despite privacy controls. Looks like we have a definitive answer.
17:23:51 <Yianni> ...how to incentive people to participate in surveys
17:24:07 <Chris_IAB> Yianni- to clarify for the record, George did not say that privacy policies are "more important" (but that's what you wrote) - he didn't use those words
17:24:38 <yrlesru> Zakim, yrlesru is Frank Dawson
17:24:38 <Zakim> I don't understand 'yrlesru is Frank Dawson', yrlesru
17:24:39 <Yianni> ...slide 9 for new media
17:24:56 <jchester2> We should review: http://www.measurementnow.net/faqs.html
17:24:58 <Yianni> ...take an ad campaign tag it and see how many people were exposed to it
17:25:09 <Yianni> ...summarized issue on right of the slide
17:25:27 <Yianni> ...for user-centric most of it is opt-in
17:25:42 <Yianni> ...common issues are for al organizations
17:25:50 <Yianni> ...these are the areas we concentrate
17:25:54 <johnsimpson> q?
17:25:58 <Yianni> ...that is the general backgrond, do people have questions
17:26:05 <aleecia> q-
17:26:09 <jmayer> q+
17:26:13 <Yianni> Peter: going to ask questions first, then people can get on the queue
17:26:15 <aleecia> (wasn't ack'ed from before)
17:26:19 <yrlesru> Zakim, yrlesru is FrankDawson
17:26:19 <Zakim> sorry, yrlesru, I do not recognize a party named 'yrlesru'
17:26:33 <Yianni> Peter: Audit function- someone bought a certain things and was it delivered?
17:26:49 <Yianni> ...might have more like general market research, wat are race and age characteristics
17:26:57 <Yianni> ...are some of these audits and others market research?
17:27:06 <Yianni> George: we audit media research
17:27:20 <Yianni> ...do not answer general census data
17:27:30 <David_MacMillan_> David_MacMillan_ has joined #dnt
17:27:40 <Yianni> ...we audit a product that tracks or gains an understanding of media uses, what do people watch, listen on the radio
17:27:55 <Yianni> ...what internet websites do they visit, what billboards do they see when driving to work
17:28:03 <justin_> Chris-IAB, He didn't say more important, but he did say that self-imposed retention limitations for privacy reasons trump the MRC's retention requirements.
17:28:10 <npdoty> Zakim, ??P17 is probably Frank_Dawson
17:28:10 <Zakim> +Frank_Dawson?; got it
17:28:12 <jchester2> +q
17:28:18 <Yianni> ...most of them are samples, standard- sample must represent population being measured
17:28:42 <Yianni> ...we audit the controls around the measurement and methodology as well
17:28:56 <yrlesru> Zakim, is yrlesru here
17:28:56 <Zakim> yrlesru, you need to end that query with '?'
17:29:03 <Yianni> Peter: timing - period that a measurement is in the field, a campaign, is that days, weeks, months?
17:29:13 <yrlesru> Zakim, is yrlesru here?
17:29:13 <Zakim> yrlesru, I do not see Yrlesru anywhere
17:29:23 <peterswire> q?
17:29:32 <Yianni> George: it varies. television and radio are in periods
17:29:40 <Yianni> ...could be a 6 or 7 day period or a 30 day period
17:29:55 <Yianni> Peter: survey around online?
17:30:09 <yrlesru> Zakim, P17?? is Frank_Dawson
17:30:09 <Zakim> sorry, yrlesru, I do not recognize a party named 'P17??'
17:30:15 <Yianni> George: in digital realm it is very different, the length of campaigns are determined by marketers
17:30:26 <peterswire> q?
17:30:29 <Yianni> ...example, marketing campaign to sell a car, start 2 months out
17:30:30 <yrlesru> Zakim, ??P17 is Frank_Dawson
17:30:30 <Zakim> I already had ??P17 as Frank_Dawson?, yrlesru
17:30:46 <Yianni> ...track campaign for entire life cycle, can track every month, week, or daily
17:30:58 <Yianni> ...it can be customized based on marketers demand
17:31:12 <Yianni> ...A month or 2 months is on the long side of a campaign
17:31:19 <npdoty> ack jmayer
17:31:20 <Yianni> ...sale at target could be 2 days before the sale
17:31:21 <aleecia> This is highly informative
17:31:24 <dsinger> q?
17:31:24 <peterswire> q?
17:31:42 <Yianni> Jonathan: Had debates on the issue of whether MRC requires certain forms of data collection or retention
17:31:55 <Yianni> ...rather they are general practices or give way to rules around consumer privacy
17:31:59 <jchester2> zakim, unmute me
17:31:59 <Zakim> jchester2 should no longer be muted
17:32:03 <hefferjr> it is not unusaly for online campaigns run for more than 4 months
17:32:06 <Wileys> Zakim, Wileys is part of [Yahoo!]
17:32:06 <Zakim> I don't understand 'Wileys is part of [Yahoo!]', Wileys
17:32:17 <hefferjr> oops, unusual
17:32:23 <Chris_IAB> q+
17:32:28 <Wileys> Zakim, Wileys is [Yahoo!]
17:32:28 <Zakim> +[Yahoo!]; got it
17:32:29 <Yianni> ...just wanted to confirm that MRC follows that when privacy concerns conflict with retention, privacy concerns trump ordinary business of tracking and retaining data
17:32:46 <Yianni> George: you are correct, mainly comes up in more passive tracking enviornment
17:32:52 <David_MacMillan> David_MacMillan has joined #dnt
17:32:52 <jmayer> s/retention/collection and retention/
17:32:59 <kulick> kulick is part of [Yahoo!]
17:33:03 <npdoty> right, in the active panel market research approach won't generally have a user opt-out conflict
17:33:05 <Yianni> ...in everyone, we say they can follow organizational privacy concern
17:33:16 <npdoty> ack jchester
17:33:35 <Yianni> Jeff Chester: can you talk about the 3MS? initiative?
17:33:36 <kulick> Zakim, kulick is [Yahoo!]
17:33:36 <Zakim> sorry, kulick, I do not recognize a party named 'kulick'
17:33:43 <peterswire> q?
17:33:53 <Yianni> ...can you talk about view of viewable impression?
17:34:03 <Yianni> George: very large topic, try to summarize
17:34:17 <Yianni> ...3MS was an initiative started by major trade association in media business
17:34:39 <Yianni> ...wanted to do was try to make digital advertising enviornment more effective
17:34:52 <Yianni> ...try to allign to make more measureable with other media measurement
17:35:11 <Yianni> ...in television only count ads that are viewed
17:35:37 <Yianni> ...because of technology implementation, there were no technology to determine whether someone actually saw the ad (below the fold)
17:35:50 <npdoty> this link jchester pointed out earlier is a helpful FAQ: http://www.measurementnow.net/faqs.html
17:35:55 <Yianni> ...people still paid for the ad, but the ad may have been served outside viewable space
17:36:11 <Yianni> ...if you want to measure digital, you had to make viewable (needed the technology)
17:36:30 <Yianni> ...people are using technics that they embed that determines whether ad is viewable
17:36:49 <Yianni> ...industry made a recomendation that we change currency from served ads to viewable ads
17:37:07 <Yianni> ...3MS used a large consulting firm and lots of participants, and have turned over project to MRC
17:37:08 <Brooks> q?
17:37:16 <peterswire> q+
17:37:21 <Yianni> ...MRC is taking viewable content and making it operable in ecosystem
17:37:33 <Yianni> ...we are setting the standard of viewable, leading this now
17:37:49 <Yianni> ...we are aligned with this concept that ads should be monitized when viewed
17:38:10 <Yianni> ...another of 3MS how to do cross media standards
17:38:13 <JC> Not I
17:38:13 <Brooks> no audio problems here
17:38:22 <Walter> npdoty: it is probably just you
17:38:29 <Yianni> ...basically background on project, have to have inteligent about page that you have not had before
17:38:32 <Walter> it drops, but not in a very noticable way
17:38:34 <eberkower> audio has been fine for me
17:38:39 <Yianni> ...does not have any personal information about who is accessing page
17:39:14 <jchester2> zakim, mute me
17:39:14 <Zakim> jchester2 should now be muted
17:39:30 <npdoty> the FAQ seemed to suggest that it did include data about the audience: "Digital GRPs will be based on viewable impressions and reflect age, gender and ethnicity demographics, with ability to add further demo and behavioral targeting."
17:39:39 <Yianni> Chris: IAB, question with regard to details of Jonathans question
17:39:50 <jchester2> Yes. thanks Nick!
17:39:51 <Yianni> ...talked about auditing, a little less on accrediting side
17:40:13 <Yianni> ...Jonathan is refering to debate that when user opted out (DNT=1)
17:40:20 <Zakim> -Frank_Dawson?
17:40:24 <jmayer> +q
17:40:28 <Brooks> q+
17:40:32 <npdoty> ack Chris_IAB
17:40:33 <Yianni> ...Jonathan is talking about idea that we would not do any data collection on that user for any purposes
17:40:51 <jmayer> That's not true. I have never suggested Do Not Track would eliminate all data collection.
17:41:01 <justin_> Not "none" --- the Stanford/EFF proposal allowed for a fair amount of data collection.
17:41:12 <Yianni> ...you would shorten time of retention versus not collecting data at all and not being accountable in the market
17:41:34 <justin_> Chris_IAB, that is what *no one* is talking about.
17:41:35 <Yianni> George: generally you do not see organizational policy that we will not track at all, not what MRC runs into in practce
17:41:36 <peterswire> q?
17:41:58 <dwainberg> q+
17:41:58 <Yianni> ...we should limiting of tracking of certain types of information, personally identifiable information or historical records of how cookies interact with people
17:42:07 <Zakim> +??P17
17:42:13 <johnsimpson> Q?
17:42:15 <Yianni> ...policies that are focused on sensitive information and generally what comes up with data retention
17:42:39 <aleecia> q+
17:42:46 <Yianni> ...we do not see that we are tracking general ad impression, generally those are allowed to be tracked by privacy policy
17:42:52 <Yianni> ...have never runned into that concern
17:43:12 <peterswire> special meaning to "raising pen"?
17:43:17 <npdoty> it might be hard to speculate, but I wonder if an organization has a privacy policy to drop data from a certain set of users (or some fraction of the data from those users), whether it would still be in compliance with MRC audit requirements
17:43:17 <Yianni> ...there is sensitive information (we audit cable organization- what you watch on tv can be sensitive)
17:43:32 <justin_> He wants to rebut Chris_IAB's mischaracterization of his position.
17:43:39 <Yianni> ...we respect stringent privacy policies for sensitive data
17:43:43 <Walter> peterswire: it means that Jonathan wants to interject a question
17:44:33 <Walter> can we let Jonathan finish?
17:44:41 <Yianni> Jonathan: step 1. One of the proposals in the group has not been to cease all data collection
17:44:57 <Yianni> ...that collection aligns with how MRC sees more senstive data
17:45:13 <Yianni> ...example, ad shows up on website, website can retain the fact that ad was displayed
17:45:16 <BerinSzoka> wow, Jonathan: maybe you could try just a little not to make this personal and accuse people of misrepresenting you?  For example, you might say, "Excuse me, but I think I haven't made my point quite clear. Let me try again." That's how adults communicate
17:45:31 <Yianni> ...lets suppose all of that is allowed to be retained, but all other information about user cannot be retained
17:45:34 <peterswire> please keep comments focused on substance, online and in voice
17:45:45 <Yianni> ...if DNT was to go so far, would that impression information still be okay
17:45:50 <Brooks> Jonathan: what you suggest is not possible
17:45:50 <peterswire> q?
17:45:51 <Yianni> ...no one has suggested that is off the table
17:46:00 <johnsimpson> q
17:46:07 <johnsimpson> q?
17:46:09 <aleecia> could we get an answer to Jonathan's question?
17:46:14 <jmayer> Um, what happened to my question?
17:46:17 <Yianni> Peter: could you help me understand, financial audits
17:46:29 <johnsimpson> jonathan?what happened to answer to
17:46:29 <Yianni> ...is there another realm of people doing financial audits?
17:46:34 <Brooks> if you store granular data that includes discreet identifiers they are inhernently linkable
17:46:38 <Walter> indeed, I haven't heard an answer
17:46:41 <Walter> +q
17:46:44 <Yianni> George: yes, we do not measure financial information, we measure audience
17:46:56 <Yianni> ...others do financial audits, did they get what they paid for
17:47:15 <aleecia> well, Jonathan's still in the queue: perhaps he can ask succinctly when it comes back around
17:47:15 <Yianni> ...Advertiser makes an investment of $100 million ad campaign, go to ad agency
17:47:28 <Yianni> ...tell impression of each media type, then ad agency executes
17:47:34 <Yianni> Peter: who should we go to?
17:47:50 <Yianni> George: association for online advertising for companies that do that (do not remember the name)
17:48:11 <Yianni> ...companies audit that the company spent $100 million, did they get the impression, should there be refunds (MRC does not do)
17:48:17 <johnsimpson> q?
17:48:44 <aleecia> ack peterswire
17:48:47 <aleecia> ack brooks
17:49:16 <Yianni> Brooks: okay to ask, what is the importance of those types of audits and the typical information that needs to be kept
17:49:26 <npdoty> we have ad association folks here; do they have a sense of what organization is in place for financial audit standards? are there other standards for us to be aware of?
17:49:30 <Yianni> ...purchasing for specific locale need IP information
17:49:30 <jmayer> I have to run to class. Here's a recap of my question: If Do Not Track were to mean a company can collected impression data (e.g. ad X was shown on site Y at time Z) but cannot collect user-specific data (e.g. no unique IDs, no IP address), would that be OK? Nobody in the group has advocated anything so restrictive, but if I understood the previous comment, Do Not Track could go that far and still align with MRC rules.
17:49:42 <Yianni> George: there are traditional media companies that do auditing he previous mentioned
17:49:52 <Walter> jmayer: I'm going to rephrase your question anyway
17:49:52 <Yianni> ...in digital world, there are ad verification services
17:49:59 <justin_> DoubleVerify and the like . . .
17:50:06 <Yianni> ...paid to follow digital advertising and see if ad met certain terms and conditions
17:50:19 <Yianni> ...it did not appear in harmful media enviornemnts (DIsney on a porn website)
17:50:28 <peterswire> q?
17:50:33 <Yianni> ...MRC does do audits of that sort, even wrote the standard
17:50:43 <dwainberg> q-
17:50:47 <jmayer> q-
17:51:01 <Yianni> ...for tracking of whether certain terms and conditions are met (ex. geo-location to appear in US)
17:51:08 <justin_> q+
17:51:21 <Yianni> Brook: when you do that type of audit, you need to retain things like IP address (show ad did not show up in RUssia)
17:51:25 <Yianni> George: that is correct
17:51:33 <Yianni> Aleecia: 3 questions
17:51:49 <Yianni> ...first, are there any cases where you have required data retention for one years
17:51:58 <Yianni> Geroge: no, we have a standard for a year
17:52:16 <Yianni> Aleecia: we do not distinguish content like children data (senstitive data a part of )
17:52:20 <Zakim> -Marc_
17:52:31 <Yianni> ...if we limiting data rentetion data for 6 weeks, would that be a problem?
17:52:44 <Yianni> George: it would be a sever problem for the industry, not a problem for me
17:53:05 <Yianni> ...should recognize the difference between sensitive data and non-sensitive data
17:53:11 <Chris_IAB> Yianni, not a "server" problem, a "severe" problem
17:53:14 <Chris_IAB> for the record
17:53:22 <justin_> -q
17:53:25 <npdoty> do MRC standards/audits explain what they consider sensitive or not sensitive?
17:53:31 <npdoty> s/sever problem/severe problem/
17:53:39 <Chris_IAB> Yianni, please note your typo above-- it's important for the record - thanks :)
17:54:14 <Yianni> Aleecia: if we decided to limit data (no IP adresss, no user id)
17:54:31 <Yianni> George: would not afffect auditing, but would hurt the system
17:54:34 <Chris_IAB> npdoty, thanks!
17:54:46 <Yianni> ...people would not believe in the value of the ad because there is no intellligence around it
17:55:35 <Yianni> ...Not saying it has to be personal information, but they has to be intelligence around transaction to know that it has value
17:55:56 <jchester2> They will want to know about individuals and their behavior.
17:55:58 <Yianni> Aleecia: could have a count of this many people in this area code without having IP address
17:56:18 <Yianni> George: throwing out hypos, but not saying you need IP address.
17:56:22 <Zakim> -schunter
17:56:31 <Yianni> ...personally he does not feel they are not that sensitive
17:56:37 <David_macmillan> David_macmillan has joined #dnt
17:56:37 <BerinSzoka> @Yianni, shall I take over scribing?
17:56:38 <peterswire> given the work done by our next speaker, we are going to shift to that part after this
17:56:41 <susanisrael> yianni, i think george said he's not saying you DON'T need ip address
17:56:55 <Yianni> Yea, you can take over scribing
17:57:02 <npdoty> scribenick: BerinSzoka
17:57:24 <justin_> jchester2, I don't think he's saying they need to measure cross-site behavior on an individual basis.  He's saying the individual information is useful on measuring each separate client.
17:57:45 <justin_> s/on/in
17:57:50 <Walter> q-
17:57:55 <justin_> ack aleecia
17:58:01 <npdoty> George: for the example of search marketing ... stricter privacy polices, and I can audit to that policy
17:58:08 <Zakim> -robsherman
17:58:10 <npdoty> +1, thanks very much George!
17:58:12 <BerinSzoka> OK, I'm taking over scribing now...
17:58:24 <Chris_IAB> thank you George
17:58:29 <phildpearce> Useful link - Re: ClickFraud or Impression fraud, I have seen IP + user-agent  + referral used to detect valid clicks and  valid impression here: http://www.adometry.com/publishers-ad-networks/click-forensics/index.php
17:58:48 <npdoty> http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/homomorphic.dnt.pdf
17:59:03 <npdoty> Topic: Khaled, Homomorphic Encryption
17:59:05 <Zakim> -George_Ivie
17:59:08 <npdoty> scribenick: BerinSzoka
17:59:30 <BerinSzoka> Starting now Dr. Khaled El Emam, Canada Research Chair in Electronic Health Information CHEO Research Institute and University of Ottawa http://ehip.blogs.com/about.html
17:59:53 <BerinSzoka> slides not available during call
18:00:34 <aleecia> To summarize so I remember this later: as per George, 1 year is max retention for their audits; they could audit if we capped all retention to 6 weeks; if we limited data retention or collection to aggregate data they could audit to that. However, George strongly notes this may not be a good idea for the industry: just because they can do the audits does not mean it's a good idea for the ecosystem. But, there are no barriers to whatever we want to do based o[CUT]
18:00:35 <aleecia> requirements.  (If someone else thinks we had a different dialog, please set me straight)
18:00:48 <BerinSzoka> Khaled: I'm focused on problem of understanding ad effectiveness, especially matching individuals who saw an ad online, then went to an offline store--linking the two events together using a user ID
18:00:50 <npdoty> slides are available -- http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/homomorphic.dnt.pdf -- though not everyone may have reviewed the FPF document -- http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/measuring.fpf.docx
18:01:37 <BerinSzoka> Khaled: "Salting" hashing means adding some random values to a hash to prevent it from being reidentified
18:02:27 <BerinSzoka> if the unique user id isn't a unique identifier, it's possible to do frequency attacks on hash values
18:02:40 <BerinSzoka> 3 concerns have been expressed about using hash values for matching
18:03:07 <Zakim> -vinay
18:03:13 <BerinSzoka> (frankly, this presentation being rather technical, I think it doesn't make sense to have a lawyer scribe it.  can someone who knows this stuff better than me scribe this?)
18:03:44 <peterswire> any techies able to scribe?
18:03:48 <BerinSzoka> 3 different trust models when you have third parties involved
18:03:57 <Zakim> -Peder_Magee
18:04:36 <BerinSzoka> second kind of trust model is "honest but curious" (passive adversary)
18:05:17 <BerinSzoka> we use this model in health care because we assume public health providers are honest but curious--won't deliberately attack data
18:05:41 <BerinSzoka> if data is breached, it's not a risk because it's not possible to extract PII from breach data
18:06:26 <BerinSzoka> seriously, folks, I'm not qualified to scribe this. could someone else please take over?
18:06:29 <susanisrael> aleecia, re your comment way earlier, i heard a little more nuance  in what george said.
18:06:29 <npdoty> in the fully malicious case, the attacker may inject false data
18:06:32 <npdoty> scribenick: npdoty
18:06:52 <npdoty> Khaled: in terms of speed, matching algorithms can be scalable, but not all computations will work that way
18:07:07 <BerinSzoka> thanks, nick!
18:07:23 <npdoty> ... homomorphic encryption is used in these secure, multi-party communications
18:07:40 <npdoty> ... a party can count the sum of a few numbers without knowing the numbers themselves
18:08:14 <npdoty> ... transform multiplications into sums, and vice versa
18:08:20 <susanisrael> noting that walt michel has joined me in the room listening to Khaled's presentation
18:08:31 <Zakim> -moneill2
18:08:46 <npdoty> a * b equivalent to encrypted version of a + b
18:09:07 <npdoty> Khaled: easier in the context of encryption
18:09:21 <npdoty> ... if you're able to do addition and multiplication, able to do quite complex operations
18:09:33 <Zakim> +Chris_Pedigo
18:09:38 <npdoty> ... public key encryption
18:09:46 <npdoty> ... two different keys for encryption and decryption
18:09:52 <Zakim> +[IPcaller]
18:09:56 <npdoty> ... randomized public key encryption
18:10:03 <moneill2> zakim, [ipcaller] is me
18:10:04 <Zakim> +moneill2; got it
18:10:22 <npdoty> ... add a different random value to the same message each time
18:10:50 <npdoty> ... c1 and c2 are encryptions of the same data, but have a different result; this is different from hashing, which would return the same value on the same message
18:11:01 <npdoty> ... an important property because it removes the risk of frequency attacks
18:11:29 <npdoty> ... but decrypted we get the same original message
18:12:05 <Chris_IAB> detailed.  understatement of year so far :)
18:12:19 <Chris_IAB> interesting stuff though :)
18:12:20 <npdoty> ... (more detailed than you might have expected; explaining notation)
18:12:43 <Zakim> -jchester2
18:12:45 <Zakim> -Chris_Pedigo
18:12:47 <npdoty> ... [encrypted version of a plain text]
18:12:58 <npdoty> ... [a] * [b] = [a + b]
18:13:09 <npdoty> ... by multiplying two encrypted numbers you can get the sum of the original values
18:13:29 <npdoty> ... [a]^b = [ab]
18:13:51 <npdoty> ... taking an encrypted value and raising it to the power of b and send it back to you, you get the product of a and b
18:14:15 <npdoty> ... deterministic matching between parties A and B
18:14:30 <npdoty> ... the result is 0 if the numbers are the same and a large random number otherwise
18:14:36 <Zakim> +Chris_Pedigo
18:14:47 <johnsimpson> q?
18:15:22 <justin_> After this, I will want someone to tell me whether this allows companies to study users longitudinally while prohibiting them from ever tying the data set back to a user or device if they were strongly motivated to do so.
18:15:24 <npdoty> ... a standard protocol for two parties to determine whether the value is the same without revealing to either party what the other's number is
18:15:52 <justin_> Setting aside the question of whether a collection of url streams over time is intrinsically identifying.
18:16:20 <Zakim> -chapell
18:16:34 <npdoty> ... the second party can't use frequency attacks to determine the value since the encrypted values are different (random public key encryption described above)
18:16:50 <Zakim> +Alan
18:17:06 <npdoty> ... sending the result back, once decrypted, reveals whether or not the value is the same
18:17:32 <npdoty> ... Paillier (slow, and patented) or Exponential Elgamal (very fast)
18:17:33 <laurengelman> i am lost
18:18:07 <npdoty> ... for determining whether values match, this is very efficient, and quick to encrypt/decrypt
18:18:41 <npdoty> ... in a fully homomorphic scheme, you can do any number of operations, but not easily scalable and has problems of key management
18:19:16 <npdoty> ... (Gentry), currently not performant
18:19:34 <npdoty> peterswire: what are the key advantages? (slide 20)
18:20:07 <npdoty> ack justin
18:20:47 <npdoty> justin: ad networks that collect URL streams -- could hash that, but then could easily re-link those URLs to a single user
18:21:23 <npdoty> ... hypothetically, could send those URLs to some trusted party to do analysis, but couldn't re-link it to a cookie or unique user ID they use
18:21:38 <npdoty> ... is that what we could do with homomorphic encryption?
18:21:59 <npdoty> khaled: use case is linking two data sets with some user id, for example, between online and offline data
18:22:06 <npdoty> ... could be generalized to the example of matching URLs
18:22:54 <npdoty> khaled: data vault would generate the public keys and send to the different parties
18:23:28 <npdoty> ... site would encrypt its data and send encrypted data to the other party (the offline retailer, say)
18:23:59 <npdoty> ... retailer would do a comparison, but couldn't yet see the results
18:24:23 <npdoty> ... able to do this efficiently for very large data sets
18:24:35 <npdoty> ... retailer would send the comparison results back to the data vault
18:24:44 <npdoty> ... and could then tell you which records matched
18:26:07 <npdoty> ... can efficiently determine whether offline and online visitors were the same, without revealing to the retailer who visited the web site
18:26:23 <npdoty> ... only attack is if the retailer, in this example, introduces false data (like a famous person's ID)
18:26:47 <npdoty> ... would prohibit via contract and auditing; this is the malicious case
18:27:07 <npdoty> ... used for fraud protection and health data
18:27:24 <npdoty> ... I think it addresses all the problems previously raised with hashing
18:27:35 <justin_> q+
18:27:36 <npdoty> ... no practical issues for performance, encryption can be done in the browser
18:27:43 <Brooks> q?
18:27:47 <npdoty> peterswire: are there patent issues? is a license needed?
18:28:19 <npdoty> khaled: no, everything you would need is public. the "special sauce" is just for efficiency on large databases; these are all public techniques that have been around for years
18:28:40 <npdoty> justin: can you explain why the data vault is not trusted?
18:28:59 <npdoty> khaled: the data vault only gets match results, just 0s and random numbers, don't have access to any of the records
18:29:39 <npdoty> justin: for a single party, a web site wants to study whether they are return visitors, but wants to lose the ability to tie back to their own identifier
18:30:15 <npdoty> khaled: the topology would be different; would encrypt the data, go through a similar scheme, and use the data vault to decrypt the data in the end
18:30:30 <laurengelman> bye all.  wishing you a productive meeting in Boston!
18:30:36 <npdoty> peterswire: thanks to Khaled for going through a lot in a very short time
18:30:40 <Zakim> -laurengelman
18:30:48 <johnsimpson> johnsimpson has left #dnt
18:31:01 <npdoty> ... hope Justin and Khaled can follow up offline. if anyone can help translate those questions, let them know.
18:31:14 <npdoty> ... gone through a lot today, hope these background topics are useful for Boston
18:31:16 <Zakim> -[Apple]
18:31:17 <npdoty> ... thanks to everybody
18:31:17 <Zakim> -??P17
18:31:17 <Zakim> - +1.202.331.aagg
18:31:18 <Zakim> -rvaneijk
18:31:18 <Zakim> -Chris_Pedigo
18:31:18 <Zakim> -Peter_Swire
18:31:18 <Zakim> - +1.613.797.aamm
18:31:19 <Zakim> -hwest
18:31:19 <Zakim> -bryan
18:31:19 <Zakim> -dwainberg
18:31:20 <Zakim> -vincent
18:31:20 <Zakim> -[CDT]
18:31:20 <Zakim> -Keith_Scarborough
18:31:21 <Zakim> -hefferjr
18:31:21 <Zakim> -Aleecia
18:31:22 <Zakim> -moneill2
18:31:22 <Zakim> -eberkower
18:31:23 <dwainberg> dwainberg has left #dnt
18:31:24 <Zakim> -ninjamarnau
18:31:24 <Zakim> -David_MacMillan
18:31:24 <Zakim> -[Yahoo!]
18:31:24 <Zakim> -adrianba
18:31:25 <Zakim> -[Mozilla]
18:31:25 <Zakim> -yianni
18:31:26 <Zakim> -jeffwilson
18:31:26 <Zakim> -johnsimpson
18:31:27 <Zakim> -Chris_IAB
18:31:33 <npdoty> Zakim, list attendees
18:31:33 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been +1.646.654.aaaa, Aleecia, rvaneijk, eberkower, moneill2, +1.703.861.aabb, jeffwilson, dsinger, dwainberg, npdoty, yianni, [Microsoft],
18:31:37 <Zakim> ... Peter_Swire, +1.919.388.aacc, +1.212.571.aadd, Keith_Scarborough, Walter, vincent, [CDT], vinay, +44.772.301.aaee, +1.310.292.aaff, Jonathan_Mayer, hefferjr, johnsimpson,
18:31:37 <Zakim> ... adrianba, +1.202.331.aagg, bryan, +1.212.972.aahh, Peder_Magee, +1.650.391.aaii, sidstamm, SusanIsrael, hwest, robsherman, George_Ivie, +1.503.264.aajj, schunter,
18:31:42 <Zakim> ... +1.202.835.aakk, Brooks, Marc_, ninjamarnau, +1.646.666.aall, BerinSzoka, +1.613.797.aamm, Chris_IAB, chapell, jchester2, David_MacMillan, laurengelman, Frank_Dawson?,
18:31:42 <Zakim> ... [Yahoo!], Chris_Pedigo, Alan
18:31:42 <Zakim> -[Microsoft]
18:31:52 <npdoty> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:31:52 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/06-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
18:32:08 <npdoty> rrsagent, make logs public
18:32:10 <npdoty> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:32:10 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/06-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
18:32:30 <npdoty> Meeting: Tracking Protection Working Group teleconference
18:32:34 <npdoty> chair: peterswire
18:32:44 <npdoty> scribe: yianni, npdoty
18:32:48 <npdoty> RRSAgent, please draft minutes
18:32:48 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2013/02/06-dnt-minutes.html npdoty
18:33:31 <Zakim> -npdoty
18:35:20 <Zakim> -SusanIsrael
18:36:39 <yrlesru> yrlesru has joined #DNT
18:38:24 <Zakim> -Alan
18:45:28 <peterswire> -peterswire
18:56:06 <kulick> kulick has joined #dnt
19:00:46 <felixwu> felixwu has left #dnt
19:05:56 <kulick> kulick has left #dnt
19:18:49 <Zakim> -BerinSzoka
19:23:32 <Zakim> -Walter
19:42:16 <Zakim> -Brooks
20:01:36 <Zakim> -Jonathan_Mayer
21:01:34 <Zakim> - +44.772.301.aaee
21:03:59 <schunter> schunter has joined #dnt
21:06:35 <Zakim> disconnecting the lone participant, AnnaLong?, in T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM
21:06:37 <Zakim> T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has ended
21:06:37 <Zakim> Attendees were +1.646.654.aaaa, Aleecia, rvaneijk, eberkower, moneill2, +1.703.861.aabb, jeffwilson, dsinger, dwainberg, npdoty, yianni, [Microsoft], Peter_Swire, +1.919.388.aacc,
21:06:37 <Zakim> ... +1.212.571.aadd, Keith_Scarborough, Walter, vincent, [CDT], vinay, +44.772.301.aaee, +1.310.292.aaff, Jonathan_Mayer, hefferjr, johnsimpson, adrianba, +1.202.331.aagg, bryan,
21:06:39 <Zakim> ... +1.212.972.aahh, Peder_Magee, +1.650.391.aaii, sidstamm, SusanIsrael, hwest, robsherman, George_Ivie, +1.503.264.aajj, schunter, +1.202.835.aakk, Brooks, Marc_, ninjamarnau,
21:06:39 <Zakim> ... +1.646.666.aall, BerinSzoka, +1.613.797.aamm, Chris_IAB, chapell, jchester2, David_MacMillan, laurengelman, Frank_Dawson?, [Yahoo!], Chris_Pedigo, Alan
21:24:27 <schunter> schunter has joined #dnt
21:41:02 <schunter> schunter has joined #dnt
22:28:22 <Zakim> Zakim has left #dnt
23:49:14 <schunter> schunter has joined #dnt