15:46:00 RRSAgent has joined #dnt 15:46:00 logging to http://www.w3.org/2012/04/18-dnt-irc 15:46:03 rvaneijk has joined #dnt 15:46:09 Zakim has joined #dnt 15:46:18 Zakim, this is dnt 15:46:18 aleecia, I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM in the schedule but not yet started. Perhaps you mean "this will be dnt". 15:46:26 Zakim, this will be dnt 15:46:26 ok, aleecia; I see T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM scheduled to start in 14 minutes 15:46:42 regrets+ efelten 15:46:57 chair: aleecia, schunter 15:47:07 rrsagent, make logs public 15:47:10 agenda? 15:48:08 agenda+ Selection of scribe 15:48:19 agenda+ Any comments on minutes 15:48:41 agenda+ Review of overdue action items: https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue 15:48:58 agenda+ Request WG's permission to schedule next f2f with six weeks, not eight weeks, notice 15:49:09 agenda+ Compliance document issues, led by Aleecia 15:49:12 Hi all 15:49:24 agenda+ TPE document issues, led by Matthias and editors 15:49:34 agenda+ Announce next meeting & adjourn 15:49:40 Hi Rob 15:50:26 T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has now started 15:50:33 + +1.408.674.aaaa 15:50:44 zakim, aaaa is aleecia 15:50:44 +aleecia; got it 15:50:44 Hi, is today the TPE or compliance document? 15:50:51 split across them 15:51:12 Compliance is mostly housekeeping with one discussion on consent you might be interested in 15:51:24 ok, tnx 15:51:30 specifically, Issue-69, three proposals for what it means to give consent to be tracked. See http://www.w3.org/TR/tracking-compliance/#consent -- do we have any consensus here? 15:52:12 also going through auditing proposal, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Mar/0419.html 15:52:20 bilcorry has joined #dnt 15:52:37 ac has joined #dnt 15:52:59 good morning, Bil 15:53:35 ac, could you please let me know who you are? I'm afraid that isn't enough for me to map to a person. 15:54:58 + +31.65.141.aabb 15:55:11 Zakim, aabb is rvaneijk 15:55:12 +rvaneijk; got it 15:55:19 thanks! 15:56:04 + +1.408.223.aacc 15:56:15 +??P32 15:56:21 Zakim, aacc is bilcorry 15:56:21 +bilcorry; got it 15:56:25 new caller from 408: please mute, please associate yourself in IRC 15:56:37 thanks, Bil 15:57:05 zakim, who is making noise? 15:57:16 aleecia, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (9%), bilcorry (30%) 15:57:23 fielding has joined #dnt 15:57:24 sorry 15:57:40 I added my number to the registry, isn't Zakim suppose to know who I am? 15:57:43 so much better now than later - no worries 15:57:55 + +1.714.852.aadd 15:57:56 yes, Zakim appears to have forgotten us all again. 15:57:59 npdoty has joined #dnt 15:58:06 Zakim, mute me 15:58:06 bilcorry should now be muted 15:58:08 Zakim, aadd is fielding 15:58:08 +fielding; got it 15:58:15 thanks, Roy 15:58:30 KevinT has joined #dnt 15:58:52 +npdoty 15:58:55 +??P37 15:59:15 + +1.202.587.aaee 15:59:24 + +1.415.520.aaff 15:59:33 ifette has joined #dnt 15:59:39 zakim, aaff is KevinT 15:59:39 +KevinT; got it 15:59:40 jchester2 has joined #dnt 15:59:45 Zakim, +??P32 is schunter 15:59:45 sorry, schunter, I do not recognize a party named '+??P32' 15:59:57 +Loretta_Guarino_Reid 16:00:02 Lia has joined #dnt 16:00:04 WileyS has joined #DNT 16:00:05 ac, who are you? (we have trouble with the initials) 16:00:16 Joanne has joined #DNT 16:00:18 rarebook.law.usm.maine.edu 16:00:20 ac “rarebook.law.usm.maine.edu 16:00:34 Zakim, who's on the phone? 16:00:34 On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), ??P32, fielding, npdoty, ??P37, +1.202.587.aaee, KevinT, Loretta_Guarino_Reid 16:00:36 + +1.415.520.aagg 16:00:37 Zakim, aaee is Charles_NAI 16:00:37 +Charles_NAI; got it 16:00:38 + +1.727.686.aahh 16:00:45 sigh, zakim is backed up 16:00:46 Zakim, ??P32 is schunter 16:00:46 +schunter; got it 16:00:48 still not showing me 16:00:51 +1.415.520 is Joanne 16:00:51 thanks - any ideas on who that might be from Maine? 16:00:57 + +1.202.370.aaii 16:00:59 - +1.727.686.aahh 16:01:02 a reminder on how to identify yourself: http://www.w3.org/2001/12/zakim-irc-bot.html#callers 16:01:03 + +1.408.349.aajj 16:01:12 One of the NAI team was from Maine 16:01:17 and how to get Zakim to remember you in the future 16:01:18 robsherman has joined #dnt 16:01:18 Zakim, aajj is WileyS 16:01:18 +WileyS; got it 16:01:21 http://www.w3.org/1998/12/bridge/info/name.php3 16:01:30 + +1.727.686.aakk 16:01:31 - +1.202.370.aaii 16:01:38 + +1.202.326.aall 16:01:56 + +1.301.270.aamm 16:01:58 + +1.202.370.aann 16:01:58 pmagee has joined #dnt 16:02:00 Zakim, who is on the phone? 16:02:00 On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, npdoty, ??P37, Charles_NAI, KevinT, Loretta_Guarino_Reid, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.727.686.aakk, 16:02:03 ... +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.202.370.aann 16:02:03 +??P30 16:02:05 + +1.510.501.aaoo 16:02:06 agenda? 16:02:08 vinay has joined #dnt 16:02:14 chapell has joined #dnt 16:02:18 + +1.917.934.aapp 16:02:19 Zakim, aann is robsherman 16:02:21 -Loretta_Guarino_Reid 16:02:22 +robsherman; got it 16:02:24 +[Mozilla] 16:02:25 Chris has joined #dnt 16:02:43 +Loretta_Guarino_Reid 16:02:45 sigh 16:02:50 scribenick: jchester2 16:02:52 This is Charlie Simon from the NAI - I'm calling in from Skype and cannot associate by phone 16:02:54 Zakim, Loretta_Guarino_Reid is ifette 16:02:54 +ifette; got it 16:03:00 Hi Jeff, tnx 16:03:03 scribe: jchester2 16:03:05 justin has joined #dnt 16:03:21 Comments on minutes on agenda 16:03:24 + +1.202.637.aaqq 16:03:25 Chris Mejia from IAB also calling from Skype- cannot associate for phone 16:03:32 We have minutes from 2/29 - 4/4 listed as draft, some of which we've approved on prior calls. If you have any issues with the minutes leading up to the f2f in DC, please raise them. Otherwise, we will approve them. 16:03:33 I still need to do cleanup on our f2f minutes 16:03:35 zakim, aaqq is justin 16:03:36 +justin; got it 16:03:39 Zakim, aapp is vinay 16:03:39 +vinay; got it 16:03:40 + +1.917.318.aarr 16:03:43 I plan to do so this week and then I'll send them out 16:04:01 are there link to the minutes? 16:04:10 Zakim, ??P37 is NAI_Charlie 16:04:10 +NAI_Charlie; got it 16:04:17 hwest has joined #dnt 16:04:19 + +1.866.317.aass 16:04:31 Zakim, ??P30 is Chris_Mejia 16:04:31 +Chris_Mejia; got it 16:04:32 + +1.202.346.aatt 16:04:34 Am I scribing the whole meeting? 16:04:39 Jules_ has joined #DNT 16:04:41 the present list is rather lacking... 16:04:43 +??P73 16:04:46 Review of overdue action items: 16:04:46 https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/overdue 16:04:48 not sure if we care 16:04:51 (guessing on those two VOIP callers) 16:04:54 q+ 16:05:02 +justin.a 16:05:03 Looking forward to overdue action items 16:05:05 ack ifette 16:05:07 aatt has hwest 16:05:14 Zakim, Charles_NAI is actually unknown 16:05:14 I don't understand 'Charles_NAI is actually unknown', npdoty 16:05:19 q+ 16:05:20 Anna has joined #dnt 16:05:21 +[Microsoft] 16:05:27 Ian says present list doesn't reflect all participants 16:05:27 (Wait, how do I connect the phone number and the name? Sorry) 16:05:32 JC has joined #DNT 16:05:33 + +1.202.684.aauu 16:05:36 tl has joined #dnt 16:05:46 Nick will do clean-up of minutes and attendee list 16:06:04 vincent has joined #dnt 16:06:05 Ian referring to 4 April call 16:06:09 hwest, 16:06:10 + +1.202.744.aavv 16:06:17 Zakim, 1.917.318.aarr is Chapell 16:06:17 sorry, chapell, I do not recognize a party named '1.917.318.aarr' 16:06:20 watt is hwest 16:06:22 Nick will do clean-up on 4 April. 16:06:32 zakim, aatt is hwest 16:06:32 +hwest; got it 16:06:39 Zakim, aarr is Chapell 16:06:39 +Chapell; got it 16:06:43 + +1.202.326.aaww 16:06:43 there you go. 16:07:09 cOlsen has joined #dnt 16:07:45 sorry, yes, I think I need to do some cleanup in order to get the correct Present lists etc. for past teleconference minutes 16:07:48 Action-104, Amy Colando, drafting text for fraud/defense: Even though issue-24 is not closed, I think we can close this action, at least for now. We seem to be working up the stack a layer on permitted uses in general at the moment. 16:07:51 Overdue action items, clean-up. Action 104, Amy on call? 16:07:59 No she won't join today 16:08:00 ChrisPedigoOPA has joined #dnt 16:08:07 alex has joined #dnt 16:08:12 Action-120, Alexandros Deliyannis, web-wide exception API: It appears this action is done (see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Apr/0076.html) but issue-113 is still in discussion, I believe. Should we close the action? 16:08:14 Topic: Clean-up of action items 16:08:20 Action item 120, Alex 16:08:20 Sorry, couldn't find user - item 16:08:21 + +1.813.366.aaxx 16:08:25 hefferjr has joined #dnt 16:08:31 Dan has joined #dnt 16:08:54 enewland has joined #dnt 16:09:13 action-177? 16:09:14 ACTION-177 -- Thomas Lowenthal to add an API to let a site request a web-wide exception -- due 2012-04-19 -- OPEN 16:09:14 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/177 16:09:14 Alex identified a problem with issue Item 120 associated with. There is text for Issue 138 16:09:32 q? 16:09:36 ack npdoty 16:09:36 Mattias suggests we close 120 and focus on new issue. 16:10:10 Action-131, Roy Fielding, Use case for user agent requests on tracking status resource: looks like this is still open, could use an update on status. 16:10:14 johnsimpson has joined #dnt 16:10:22 and a new action, action-177, to do a proposal on the original question 16:10:30 tl1 has joined #dnt 16:10:41 Roy: Action 131 still open. More work coming. Another week. 16:10:47 ACTION-131? 16:10:47 ACTION-131 -- Roy Fielding to sketch use case for user agent requests on tracking status resource -- due 2012-04-03 -- OPEN 16:10:47 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/131 16:10:51 + +1.813.366.aayy 16:10:57 - +1.727.686.aakk 16:11:04 Mattias suggests we opened a # of actions and we need dates added. 16:11:09 Action-135, Shane Wiley, detail use case for issue-111 (dnt:2): this has been closed and reopened once. I *think* it should now be closed, but will hear from Shane to be sure. 16:11:13 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:11:13 On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, npdoty, NAI_Charlie, Charles_NAI, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, 16:11:16 ... robsherman, Chris_Mejia, +1.510.501.aaoo, vinay, [Mozilla], ifette, justin, Chapell, +1.866.317.aass, hwest, ??P73, justin.a, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, +1.202.744.aavv, 16:11:16 ... +1.202.326.aaww, +1.813.366.aaxx, +1.813.366.aayy 16:11:31 zakim, mozilla has tl 16:11:31 +tl; got it 16:11:32 -Chapell 16:11:42 + +1.310.392.aazz 16:12:03 zakim johnsimpson is aazz 16:12:15 zakim, alex is aaxx 16:12:15 sorry, alex, I do not recognize a party named 'alex' 16:12:16 action-135 to move to pending review 16:12:16 Shane says we have draft text on DNT header 16:12:24 zakim, who is on the phone 16:12:24 I don't understand 'who is on the phone', johnsimpson 16:12:29 zakim, aaxx is alex 16:12:29 +alex; got it 16:12:32 zakim, who is on the phone? 16:12:32 On the phone I see aleecia, rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, npdoty, NAI_Charlie, Charles_NAI, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, 16:12:35 ... robsherman, Chris_Mejia, +1.510.501.aaoo, vinay, [Mozilla], ifette, justin, +1.866.317.aass, hwest, ??P73, justin.a, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, +1.202.744.aavv, 16:12:35 ... +1.202.326.aaww, alex, +1.813.366.aayy, +1.310.392.aazz 16:12:35 [Mozilla] has tl 16:12:42 Tom: Does pending review status says we have proposed text 16:13:03 tedleung has joined #dnt 16:13:06 Zakim, Charles_NAI is 1.202.587.aaee 16:13:07 +1.202.587.aaee; got it 16:13:17 apologies, bad traffic today 16:13:24 dsriedel has joined #dnt 16:13:28 Tom: Is this issue still open because we no text for it. 16:13:28 + +1.206.369.bbaa 16:13:32 zakim, mute me 16:13:32 sorry, johnsimpson, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:13:39 + +49.721.913.74.bbbb 16:13:43 Mattias: We have to put this issue in pending rveiew because there is text. 16:13:50 zakim, bbbb is dsriedel 16:13:50 +dsriedel; got it 16:13:55 zakim, mute me 16:13:55 dsriedel should now be muted 16:14:05 can someone point us to the text proposal for 135? just having a link in the action would be helpful here 16:14:16 zakim, tedleung is bbaa 16:14:16 sorry, tedleung, I do not recognize a party named 'tedleung' 16:14:26 Zakim, bbaa is tedleung 16:14:27 +tedleung; got it 16:14:28 Fair - we have framing text but not proposed final text 16:14:33 jmayer has joined #dnt 16:14:40 zakim, johnsimpson is 310.392.aazz 16:14:40 sorry, johnsimpson, I do not recognize a party named 'johnsimpson' 16:15:11 so, we can re-assign to Matthias to send out a specific text proposal? 16:15:11 zakim, aazz is johnsimpson 16:15:11 +johnsimpson; got it 16:15:12 Action-139, Tom Lowenthal, reword "affirmatively clicking" to something more general than clicking: this has been open 6 weeks. Would someone other than Tom be willing to pick it up? Shouldn't be too hard, should get done, but we need to get this out of lingering. 16:15:21 ACTION-139? 16:15:21 ACTION-139 -- Thomas Lowenthal to improve wording of 3.9 "Meaningful Interaction" to avoid "affirmatively clicking" and make sure that "clicking" is replaced with something more general. -- due 2012-04-04 -- OPEN 16:15:21 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/139 16:15:40 thanks, shane. don't know why it did n't recognize me 16:15:46 Is this ACTION mooted by our new proposal? 16:15:50 Action 139. Reword clicking concept. Looking for more general language. Anyone volunteer to take action on wording? 16:15:50 Sorry, couldn't find user - 139. 16:16:04 I don't think we required "clicking" anywhere. 16:16:30 ACTION-139 due May 14 2012 16:16:30 ACTION-139 Improve wording of 3.9 "Meaningful Interaction" to avoid "affirmatively clicking" and make sure that "clicking" is replaced with something more general. due date now May 14 2012 16:16:33 John, the format is "Z, is " 16:16:56 clicking is not required under current def 16:17:01 Action-150, Ninja Marnau, EU legal implications of *: last we heard, Ninja and Shane were working on this together. Status now? 16:17:20 +Chapell 16:17:22 Should add this to new document 16:17:37 "Global Considerations" 16:18:10 Question is whether this issue should go to new document---global considerations--move to discussion there. Waiting for developments. 16:18:16 I thought this also had implications for our API design on * vs origin/origin 16:18:20 +1 16:18:35 zakim, mute me 16:18:35 sorry, tl1, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:18:36 s/Question/WileyS: Question/ 16:18:44 action-174? 16:18:44 ACTION-174 -- Ninja Marnau to write up implication of origin/* exceptions in EU context -- due 2012-04-19 -- OPEN 16:18:44 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/174 16:18:48 zakim, mute me 16:18:48 sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:18:56 zakim, mozilla has tl 16:18:56 tl was already listed in [Mozilla], tl 16:19:07 - +1.202.684.aauu 16:19:14 zakim, how are you confused as to which phone i'm on! 16:19:14 I don't understand you, tl 16:19:21 zakim, clearly! 16:19:21 I don't understand 'clearly!', tl 16:19:32 I think that is something different 16:19:32 brilliant 16:19:36 + +1.202.684.bbcc 16:19:42 zakim, mozilla has me 16:19:42 tl was already listed in [Mozilla], tl 16:19:48 zakim, mute me. 16:19:48 sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:19:53 Zakim, bbcc is jmayer 16:19:53 +jmayer; got it 16:19:56 zakim, mozilla does not have tl 16:19:56 I don't understand 'mozilla does not have tl', tl 16:19:57 Action-151, JC Cannon, personalization for logged in: has this been overtaken by new action items from the f2f? 16:19:58 Zakim, mute Mozilla 16:19:58 [Mozilla] should now be muted 16:20:05 :) 16:20:12 That's cheating. 16:20:13 Item 151, JC on personalization for logged in 16:20:15 vincent has joined #dnt 16:20:21 Yes 16:20:33 There are open actions they make this irrelevant says Aleecia and JC. 151 closed. 16:20:38 Action-152, Shane Wiley, logged in means consent: has this been overtaken by new action items from the f2f? 16:20:51 Action-156, Heather West, change to "permitted uses" and "user granted exceptions": Heather's done some editorial work, this may be done. Status? 16:20:56 We have draft text before the group 16:20:58 Same for 152. 16:21:05 tl, you can always do 61# to mute and 60# to unmute 16:21:06 +??P9 16:21:07 Open item is for non-normative text to be drafted with Justin 16:21:09 well, we have text from Shane on 152, we can just make that pending review/closed because Shane has completed it 16:21:37 Nick, Justin and I owe the group non-normative text to support the normative text with examples 16:21:42 Action 156. Heather and Erica has done a lot of work--very close to done. 16:21:42 Sorry, couldn't find user - 156. 16:22:07 tl, i'm lazy too... 16:22:09 Action-107, Amy Colando, action is closed with a no text proposal 16:22:09 Action-123, Jeff Chester, response to 1st/3rd proposal: closed, as per WG call prior to f2f 16:22:10 Action-124, Amy Colando, draft alternate 1st/3rd proposal: closed, likewise overtaken by events 16:22:10 Action-141, Rigo Wenning, text around user agents and consent: leaving open, untouched. Rigo completed this action, to a bit of disagreement on the list. I think Rigo will not be able to make the call. We should pick this topic up and see if we can get a resolution on the next call he joins. 16:22:11 Action-162, Erica Newland, remove note from section 5.3 now that we have consensus: status? 16:22:13 Action-165, Ian Fette, geoloc compliance, non-normative text: status? 16:22:14 WileyS, is that action 179? or should we open a new action on justin regarding that? 16:22:15 Action-166, Heather West, updating text on "collection" &c: status? 16:22:24 ACTION-165? 16:22:24 ACTION-165 -- Ian Fette to draft example text around using the Geolocation API for non-normative text on "Geolocation compliance" section in Compliance -- due 2012-04-18 -- OPEN 16:22:24 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/165 16:22:25 +q 16:22:30 New business. 16:22:32 ack tl 16:22:34 zakim, unmute mozilla 16:22:34 [Mozilla] should no longer be muted 16:22:45 Zakim, [Mozilla] has tl 16:22:45 tl was already listed in [Mozilla], npdoty 16:23:01 zakim, +??P9 is vincent 16:23:01 sorry, vincent, I do not recognize a party named '+??P9' 16:23:09 Zakim, in that case, why didn't you unmute Mozilla when we ack'ed tl? 16:23:09 I don't understand your question, npdoty. 16:23:25 zakim, ??P9 is vincent 16:23:25 +vincent; got it 16:24:08 ACTION-165 due April 25 2012 16:24:08 ACTION-165 Draft example text around using the Geolocation API for non-normative text on "Geolocation compliance" section in Compliance due date now April 25 2012 16:24:08 Chapell has joined #dnt 16:24:15 Action-165. Status request for Ian 16:24:35 Ian needs another week. 16:24:56 zakim, mute mozilla 16:24:56 [Mozilla] should now be muted 16:25:15 Objection - we need 8 weeks 16:25:21 Aleecia: We can change requirement for F2F so we have six weeks, rather 8 weeks, notice. 16:25:30 eight weeks would be much better 16:26:11 agree with Shane; 6-weeks is very short notice 16:26:13 +q 16:26:19 agree with Shane et al. - please leave at eight weeks. 16:26:53 8-weeks is also tight, but doable 16:26:55 -dsriedel 16:26:56 Aleecia, have you had contact with DG INFSO ? 16:27:12 - +1.510.501.aaoo 16:27:18 I think we need to meet earlier so we can show public we are making serious progress. 16:27:21 I can't make Europe trip 16:27:24 CA, please 16:27:25 Aleecia, you have multiple folks on the chain saying they need 8 weeks. No way I can do Brussels again in 8 weeks. 16:27:26 West coast works for me too. 16:27:28 I can't make early June 16:27:35 The EU deadline for DNT is June. 16:27:37 Seriously? 16:27:40 zakim, who is speaking 16:27:40 I don't understand 'who is speaking', justin 16:27:42 Zakim, who is speaking? 16:27:42 Zakim, who's making noise? 16:27:42 europe looks very difficult 16:27:44 zakim, who is making noise 16:27:44 I don't understand 'who is making noise', fielding 16:27:46 Whiskey tango foxtrot. 16:27:49 Zakim, who is making noise? 16:27:52 zakim mute me 16:27:52 WileyS, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (50%), npdoty (19%) 16:28:00 Sounds like it is Nick 16:28:01 zakim mute me 16:28:02 Zakim, who is making noise? 16:28:03 ifette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (38%), +1.301.270.aamm (5%), npdoty (45%) 16:28:04 Are we being trolled right now, because that's what it sounds like. 16:28:07 Awesome 16:28:07 Zakim, drop aamm 16:28:07 +1.301.270.aamm is being disconnected 16:28:09 - +1.301.270.aamm 16:28:10 -npdoty 16:28:14 ifette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (94%), Chapell (19%), npdoty (15%) 16:28:25 ifette, listening for 10 seconds I heard sound from the following: aleecia (59%) 16:28:28 +npdoty 16:28:29 Zakim, mute me 16:28:29 npdoty should now be muted 16:28:39 Seriously, you can't plan travel six weeks in advance? 16:28:47 zakim, mute me 16:28:47 vincent should now be muted 16:28:51 + +1.301.270.bbdd 16:28:56 I have travel planned for the next 6 weeks already. 16:28:56 jmayer, the problem isn't finding flights or hotels, the problem is that people have exisitng commitments 16:29:27 Action-56, Kevin Trilli, auditing compliance text. In DC we did not take this up because people had not had time to review the proposal. If Kevin or Alex are on the call, I will ask for a summary of their proposal for issue-21: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Mar/0419.html [I'm particularly confused by "TSLs"; I think this is just a very bad name space collision.] 16:29:28 ifette, that's a date issue 16:29:31 Zakim, bbdd is jchester2 16:29:31 +jchester2; got it 16:29:41 Fix: float several dates in June 16:29:42 +1.301.270.jchester2 16:29:49 Zakim, aamm was jchester2 16:29:49 I don't understand 'aamm was jchester2', npdoty 16:30:07 jchester, sorry -- I asked Zakim who was making noise and it pointed to an unidentified number which turned out to be you. Nothing personal. 16:30:10 zakim. mute me 16:30:19 Zakim, mute jchester2 16:30:19 jchester2 should now be muted 16:30:27 +q 16:30:36 -q 16:31:27 Don't well known URIs and Response Headers cover this? 16:31:58 tom, pointer? 16:32:05 There are mechanisms for audit and monitoring to ensure compliance. Removing from spec doesn't may sense. Enabling may statement. Linkage in user agent. 16:32:47 Having organaizations providing list of compliant DNT players 16:33:30 aleecia, what are you asking for a pointer to? 16:33:54 zakim, unmute mozilla. 16:33:54 [Mozilla] should no longer be muted 16:34:09 ack tl 16:34:20 Kevin, Do you have text? 16:34:26 Tom says there isn't need for additional auditing compliance in the spec. 16:34:53 I think the proposal was for a field to indicate that a particular authority has done a particular type of auditing. 16:35:10 q? 16:35:12 Tom has no objection to adding field or set of fields for auditing. Doesn't think much more addition needed here. 16:35:13 zakim, mute me 16:35:13 sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:35:17 q+ 16:35:23 Zakim, mute Mozilla 16:35:23 [Mozilla] should now be muted 16:35:29 Zakim, unmute Mozilla 16:35:29 [Mozilla] should no longer be muted 16:35:44 You could probably also use the DNT-extention for audit 16:35:58 "enjoys auditing" :-) 16:35:59 s/extension/extention/ 16:36:20 q? 16:36:30 Tom: We need to ask whether this is needed in version 1. 16:36:53 ack alex 16:36:53 +q 16:36:54 I agree Nick, my fault. 16:37:31 Sounds like TPLs again 16:37:38 Alex: Clarification. This proposal is focused on external entity that you trust and have a mechanism on user agent to bring in a third party. 16:38:00 ack jmayer 16:38:01 +q 16:38:08 Is there text on this? 16:38:14 TPLs was a crazy naming problem, imho 16:38:24 text is still: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-tracking/2012Mar/0419.html 16:38:27 Jonathan believes there will be a # of methods that can be used for auditing and what's needed will shift over time. 16:38:58 We should say silent on this issue, says Jonathan, but can have a best practices doc. 16:39:00 +1 to Mayer - we should stay silent on the specs around auditing and consider having an outside document around best practices 16:39:09 -jmayer 16:39:11 It would not be difficult to add an optional field "auditor" with link as value even if it is not included in version 1 16:39:27 +jmayer 16:39:34 +q 16:39:48 fielding: Exactly. 16:39:49 +1 to fielding, a link is easy and can provide validation if you de-reference it 16:40:04 Then this seems a TPE issue. 16:40:17 Agreed, jmayer. 16:40:30 zakim, unmute me 16:40:30 sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:40:33 ack tl 16:40:36 Zakim, unmute Mozilla 16:40:36 [Mozilla] was not muted, npdoty 16:40:38 zakim, unmute mozilla 16:40:38 [Mozilla] was not muted, tl 16:41:24 Tom: Nothing stopping auditors and parties working out what should be in uri. 16:42:31 we don't need name 16:42:35 Tom proposes we add 2 fields to the spec--auditor name and auditor uri. 16:42:40 We need to allow multiple auditors. 16:42:56 schunter, ok, auditor array 16:42:59 Kevin agrees that will be sufficient as baseline. 16:43:10 fielding, agreed, auditor URI should make it easy for interested user agents to determine the auditor's real world name 16:43:21 Agreed - Yahoo! has multiple auditors that are attached to practices that may stem from DNT activities (DNT itself, financial audits, etc.) 16:43:22 q- 16:43:35 zakim, mute mozilla 16:43:35 [Mozilla] should now be muted 16:43:55 I have no objection for an array of URIs. 16:43:55 +q 16:44:01 q? 16:44:41 e.g. "auditors": ["http://www.truste.com/", "http://www.stanford.edu/"] 16:45:19 yes, action me 16:45:20 jmayer, yep -- an array makes sense 16:45:22 This belongs in TPE spec as well. Tom will do next pass on this issue and check with Kevin. 16:45:36 I suggest more like "auditors": ["http://www.truste.com/this-sites-audit.xml", "http://www.stanford.edu/this-sites-audit.xml"] 16:45:44 there are multiple auditors already working in this space, on the advertising front 16:45:52 action: lowenthal to draft specific field proposal for optional auditors (with Kevin) 16:45:52 Created ACTION-185 - Draft specific field proposal for optional auditors (with Kevin) [on Thomas Lowenthal - due 2012-04-25]. 16:45:53 Closing Action-56. 16:45:58 Action-61, Tom Lowenthal, public commitments: we were postponing issue-45 until we had greater clarity on the TPE aspects of the response. Are we ready to pick this all back up again? 16:46:21 action-61? 16:46:21 ACTION-61 -- Thomas Lowenthal to write no-change proposal for ISSUE-45 -- due 2012-02-03 -- CLOSED 16:46:21 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/61 16:46:27 tl, then we should call it "audits" 16:46:29 ISSUE-45? 16:46:29 ISSUE-45 -- Companies making public commitments with a "regulatory hook" for US legal purposes -- pending review 16:46:29 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/45 16:46:47 +q 16:46:50 zakim, unmute me 16:46:50 sorry, tl, I do not know which phone connection belongs to you 16:46:54 zakim, unmute mozilla 16:46:54 [Mozilla] should no longer be muted 16:46:54 -q 16:47:17 Tom believes this issue is almost resolved. His action-61 is closed. 16:48:28 we're talking about http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/drafts/tracking-compliance.html#enforcement 16:48:43 That non-normative addition would be a good idea. 16:49:04 I can do it 16:49:04 Jonathan says that by having response header, also fulfilled requirement. 16:49:28 action: justin to clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) 16:49:28 Created ACTION-186 - Clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) [on Justin Brookman - due 2012-04-25]. 16:49:39 action-186: related to issue-45 16:49:39 ACTION-186 Clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) notes added 16:50:12 -Chapell 16:50:12 My thoughts on a consent standard, if the group gets there, are on the list. 16:50:20 -jmayer 16:50:39 OK, will send to you after I revise. 16:50:40 action-186: tl has volunteered to help, and has opinions 16:50:40 ACTION-186 Clarify non-normative text on making a public commitment (also in a privacy policy, e.g.) notes added 16:50:40 Tom will work with Justin on this. 16:50:58 Action-49, Shane, about permitted uses. I think the definitions proposed here are already incorporated in the two major proposals, though I also think we heard from Rob that tighter definitions would be quite helpful. Suggestion: we close this action and review text as part of the proposals. 16:51:13 action-49? 16:51:13 ACTION-49 -- Shane Wiley to propose what the operational carve-outs for 3.6.1.2.1 (e.g. debugging by 3rd party) are -- due 2012-01-31 -- PENDINGREVIEW 16:51:13 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/49 16:51:23 Agreed - modifying/adding non-normative text now 16:51:41 I sent WileyS a mail, will wait for that. 16:51:56 Action-72, Kathy Joe, text for issue-25, issue-74 on permitted uses: this action is done, but I think this is getting folded into the larger proposals. There's no "postponed" state for actions, and I don't want to close it quite yet -- leaving it as pending review seems the least wrong option this week. 16:52:16 s/crusial/would be quite helpful/ 16:52:40 action-72? 16:52:40 ACTION-72 -- Kathy Joe to review aleecia's draft on issue-25, issue-74 -- due 2012-02-06 -- PENDINGREVIEW 16:52:40 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/72 16:53:18 Having discussions on higher level on permitted users. 16:53:28 Action-137, Tom Lowenthal, targeting based on registration: listed as pending review but does not link to an email thread. Status? 16:53:36 sorry. Users! 16:53:49 action-137? 16:53:49 ACTION-137 -- Thomas Lowenthal to draft alternate proposal on first-party targeting based on registration information -- due 2012-03-10 -- PENDINGREVIEW 16:53:49 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/actions/137 16:54:14 so action-72 goes to open 16:54:27 and action-137 goes to closed 16:54:27 +dsriedel 16:54:33 Tom says we close this item. 16:54:41 Action-73, action-74, action-76, action-77, action-78: these were the five views from Belgium (remember to forget me, etc.) Several of them have been incorporated in other ways. I suggest we close these now. 16:55:05 Agreed - these can be closed as the text is already in the proposals 16:55:14 you can close these. we are beyond that 16:55:27 Agreement we can close these five. 16:55:30 Issue-99, How does DNT work with Identity providers: I think we're in broad agreement that identity providers are not first parties. Looking to make sure I am correct, and looking for someone to take an action item to write this down. 16:56:07 I'm not sure that was the sense of the group, but I haven't been paying as close attention 16:56:11 q? 16:56:17 ack jmayer 16:56:23 aleecia: I think we have agreement that identity providers aren't first parties, just need to write this down? 16:56:28 Unless they somehow obtain explicit, informed consent - I believe we all agree they are 3rd party outside of the specific logging transaction 16:56:43 Agree with what Tom just said. 16:56:51 Identity providers can be both 1st and 3rd party, suggests Tom. 16:58:14 tl, happy to help/take a look at that. 16:58:32 ACTION: tl to write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 16:58:32 Sorry, amibiguous username (more than one match) - tl 16:58:32 Try using a different identifier, such as family name or username (eg. tleung2, tlowenth) 16:58:34 I would also like to help on this. 16:58:39 Issue-88, different rules for ad impressions and interactions: I do believe we can close this as "yes." Impressions -> 3rd party, interactions -> 1st party. 16:58:45 ACTION: lowenthal to write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 16:58:45 Created ACTION-187 - Write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 [on Thomas Lowenthal - due 2012-04-25]. 16:58:45 [09:58am] • trackbot noticed an ACTION. Trying to create it. 16:58:57 ACTION-187 due May 5 2012 16:58:57 ACTION-187 Write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 due date now May 5 2012 16:59:05 action-187: heather and jeff both volunteered to help review 16:59:05 ACTION-187 Write text for ISSUE-99 around identity providers as first or third parties, DUE May 5 2012 notes added 16:59:27 Agreement on issue 88. closed 16:59:35 Issue-69, three proposals for what it means to give consent to be tracked. See http://www.w3.org/TR/tracking-compliance/#consent -- do we have any consensus here? 17:00:01 The term “affirmative, informed consent” is used throughout this document. While this terminology may ultimately be modified, some options for explaining the underlying idea are presented below: 17:00:09 3.9.1 Option 1 17:00:09 "Affirmative, Informed Consent to be Tracked" means consent given by an affirmative action such as clicking a consent box in response to a clear and prominent request to ignore a "Do Not Track" setting that is distinct and separate from any other notifications or requested permissions. 17:00:10 3 proposals slightly different suggestions for what needed for affirmative informed consent. 17:00:12 zakim, mute me 17:00:12 dsriedel should now be muted 17:00:17 3.9.2 Option 2 17:00:17 "Affirmative, Informed Consent to be Tracked" has been obtained when a mechanism to provide for or facilitate the acquisition and storage of permission to ignore the header has been made available to the user and the user has meaningfully interacted with the mechanism in a way that makes clear her intent to grant this permission. 17:00:31 3.9.3 Silence 17:00:32 The hope is that this option will ensure consistency with EU regulations; it may not unless notice is included. 17:00:32 No definition, other than explicitly leaving the definition of consent to local rules. 17:00:36 not EU regulations but local regulations 17:00:37 In discussion we're using "explicit, informed consent" and Justin and I have an action to backfill this with non-normative text 17:01:00 I am still suggesting silence as an option 17:01:02 +1 for Silence 17:01:07 Aleecia asks does anyone suggestion silence is an option. 17:01:17 +1 silence 17:01:46 "The term “affirmative, informed consent” is used throughout this document." ... but then it isn't used throughout the document? 17:01:58 q+ 17:02:17 +q 17:02:20 -dsriedel 17:02:23 I don't think we should rely on such proposals as local approach that would allow silence. 17:02:26 WileyS, agree, if we're just talking about consent for out-of-band override of DNT header, I thought Justin was writing up "explicit, informed consent" with you 17:02:27 ack schunter 17:02:31 The FTC ahs been very specific on affermative and explicit consent 17:02:43 +q 17:02:57 First choice is "silence" on this topic and allow legal frameworks to determine what is valid user consent. 17:03:02 ack tl 17:03:06 Second choice is the text I'm working with Justin on 17:03:44 Tom agrees with Mattias. We should define consent standard for DNT. 17:03:56 ack jchester 17:03:56 Agree with Matthias and Tom. Need a standard in the spec. 17:04:17 Can we park this until WileyS and I have a proposed alternative? 17:04:30 +1 to justin 17:04:32 FTC uses '“Express affirmative consent' 17:05:00 There is need for concrete proposals. 17:05:19 +q 17:05:21 We have proposals, but discussions have pushed us in a new (consensus!) direction 17:05:28 ack WileyS 17:05:48 +q 17:05:57 No . . . 17:06:01 ack tl 17:06:01 Shane suggests another approach--speak to valid user consent. Use global compliance doc to go into detail. Rather than construct new psuedo legal construct. 17:06:33 Tom: Says we aren't creating a new legal construct that is part of rule system we are constructing. 17:06:43 But the URI doesn't attempt to set rules on what is a valid representation - the consent discussion does 17:06:57 I suggest that if we define consent, we should also define browser UI 17:07:05 There is additional work to be done and we will all review. 17:07:12 Housekeeping changes - again please let me know if I got anything wrong: 17:07:13 Issue-28 was closed adopting the text from action-58; closed action-58. 17:07:21 WileyS: The URI specifies what you can and can't put in it. 17:07:42 Issue-6 was closed; closed action-101 to revise issue-6. 17:07:52 Tom: Only very broadly, if the Consent definition is equally "very broad" then we may be okay 17:07:56 Action-103, Frank Wagner, EU controller v. data processor language: this action is done. We've agreed to move the text to the Global Considerations document. Closed action-103, added an action against me to migrate the text from issue-14 into the (does not exist yet) Global Considerations text. 17:08:44 Issue-26, providing data to 3rd parties and consent: comments say we closed it and why, yet it remained open. Closed now. 17:09:01 WileyS: From where I'm standing, I want something along the lines of an interactive affirmative operation, rather than checking the box that I've read the privacy policy/tos. 17:09:24 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/products/2 17:09:36 Topic: TPE Issues 17:09:43 -justin 17:09:48 Tom: That may be too detailed as that prescribes a specific UI treatment 17:10:11 Please check the issue tracker--everything should be up to date. 17:10:13 Tom: Wait to see our proposed text and see if we can find the consensus line here 17:10:42 WileyS: Agreed. 17:10:53 ISSUE-59? 17:10:53 ISSUE-59 -- Should the first party be informed about whether the user has sent a DNT header to third parties on their site? -- open 17:10:53 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/59 17:10:59 zakim, mute me 17:10:59 aleecia should now be muted 17:11:02 yes :) 17:11:07 Yes 17:11:12 Resolved by JS API, no? 17:11:14 +q 17:11:26 +q 17:11:30 q+ 17:11:34 q? 17:11:38 No one has proposed anything in this area. Proposal to close unless people comment. 17:11:40 q? 17:11:44 ack tl 17:11:54 tl: I think this is dealt with by the JS API 17:11:56 Tom: This is dealt with by Javascript API. 17:12:13 ack WileyS 17:12:27 tl, we would need an example in spec 17:12:48 Shane says this requires polling on every single user sessions, so they have proposed under Issue-111, would give first party info that is poll worthy occuring. 17:12:57 in that case, do we need two different issues for this? 17:13:14 q? 17:13:17 ack ifette 17:13:19 ack ifette 17:13:37 Ian believes this is connected to issues related to site and web-wide exceptions. 17:13:40 Site-Specific 17:13:54 Web-Wide, Site-Wide, and possibly "Site-Specific" 17:14:13 +q to say that I can't live with only site wide or web-wide exceptions. 17:14:19 - +1.866.317.aass 17:14:28 fine 17:14:31 agree to close 59 17:14:34 fine. 17:14:37 Mattias suggests we continue this discussion on Item-111 17:14:40 zakim, who is on the phone? 17:14:40 On the phone I see aleecia (muted), rvaneijk, bilcorry (muted), schunter, fielding, NAI_Charlie, 1.202.587.aaee, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, WileyS, +1.202.326.aall, robsherman, 17:14:43 ... Chris_Mejia, vinay, [Mozilla], ifette, hwest, ??P73, justin.a, [Microsoft], +1.202.744.aavv, +1.202.326.aaww, alex, +1.813.366.aayy, johnsimpson, tedleung, vincent (muted), 17:14:43 ... npdoty (muted), jchester2 17:14:43 [Mozilla] has tl 17:14:45 we have agreement, for example, that the first party is getting a header 17:14:47 works for me 17:14:48 q? 17:14:54 -q 17:15:05 ISSUE-111: subsumes issue 59 17:15:05 ISSUE-111 Signaling state/existence of site-specific exceptions notes added 17:15:10 zakim, disconnect aaee aagg aaw aaww aayy aall 17:15:10 I don't understand 'disconnect aaee aagg aaw aaww aayy aall', tl 17:15:17 zakim, disconnect aaee 17:15:17 sorry, tl, I do not see a party named 'aaee' 17:15:23 tl, are you chairing this call? 17:16:26 - +1.202.326.aaww 17:16:42 Roy says that Item-137 is part of incorporating action involving tl. 17:17:00 fielding, which action is it that should be attached to issue-137? 17:17:09 zakim, unmute me 17:17:09 aleecia should no longer be muted 17:17:18 KevinT1 has joined #dnt 17:17:25 +1 to everyone busy working on the spec :) 17:17:29 171 17:17:33 ISSUE-138? 17:17:33 ISSUE-138 -- Web-Wide Exception Well Known URI -- closed 17:17:33 http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/138 17:17:44 Issue 138 may be marked as closed, says Alex, can we please review. 17:17:50 Alex, agreed - this should be at pending review, correct? 17:18:09 how long does this call last? i thought it was 1-hour 17:18:14 Aleecia says we are be sent Doodle poll for next F2F. By Friday response. 17:18:18 thanks 17:18:47 September is good 17:18:54 LOL - a bit of a gross overstatement :-) 17:19:08 Also, the EU is going to decide if DNT is going to lead to compliance or not... in JUNE... 17:19:18 Yes issue-138 should be pending review 17:19:23 ... and currently it doesn't. 17:19:51 Perhaps the EU will need to give the working group a few more months rather come up with arbitrary deadlines 17:19:56 We need last call doc out for review, so we need a final f2f 17:20:10 +1 to alex, i think issue-138 is distinct 17:20:23 WileyS, the deadline has been there for a year now. 17:20:28 This is my opinion. We need to meet and deliver to global public a meaningful W3C DNT system. We need to meet soon for f2f. 17:20:55 s/This is my opinion./jchester2: / 17:21:13 Personally, I'd also like to get my life back. Perhaps others agree... 17:21:14 Agreed - but the work may take longer than 1 year. What was so magically about 1 year? 17:21:15 Thanks. 17:21:25 Aleecia, 17:21:28 we're already slipping past that 1 year 17:21:35 -hwest 17:21:36 +q 17:21:47 schunter: will clean this up, add more text from the email itself, move to pending review 17:21:49 Aleecia, I'm more concerned with "getting it right" than getting my life back - as if we don't get it right, I'll lose more of my life longer-term 17:22:11 +hwest 17:22:14 tl asks whether we have agreed to permit unidentified users on call. 17:22:31 WileyS, The industry now needs, by this June, to develop and deliver a standard that governs the consequences when a user does select not to be tracked, and meets other key features (http://blogs.ec.europa.eu/neelie-kroes/usa-do-not-track/#more-1488) 17:22:59 q? 17:23:05 ack tl 17:23:06 ack tl 17:23:10 - +1.202.326.aall 17:23:12 -vinay 17:23:14 -justin.a 17:23:15 - +1.202.744.aavv 17:23:16 Rob, the difficulty is that this process isn't led by "industry" therefore the delay 17:23:17 Adjourn. 17:23:19 -[Microsoft] 17:23:21 -1.202.587.aaee 17:23:22 -[Mozilla] 17:23:22 - +1.415.520.aagg 17:23:23 -robsherman 17:23:23 -aleecia 17:23:23 -vincent 17:23:24 -hwest 17:23:26 -Chris_Mejia 17:23:28 -tedleung 17:23:30 -ifette 17:23:32 -alex 17:23:34 -fielding 17:23:34 tedleung has left #dnt 17:23:35 rrsagent, draft minutes 17:23:35 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/18-dnt-minutes.html npdoty 17:23:36 -NAI_Charlie 17:23:38 -johnsimpson 17:23:39 Zakim, list participants 17:23:41 - +1.813.366.aayy 17:23:42 As of this point the attendees have been +1.408.674.aaaa, aleecia, +31.65.141.aabb, rvaneijk, +1.408.223.aacc, bilcorry, +1.714.852.aadd, fielding, npdoty, +1.202.587.aaee, 17:23:46 ... +1.415.520.aaff, KevinT, +1.415.520.aagg, +1.727.686.aahh, schunter, +1.202.370.aaii, +1.408.349.aajj, WileyS, +1.727.686.aakk, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, 17:23:48 johnsimpson has left #dnt 17:23:48 ... +1.202.370.aann, +1.510.501.aaoo, +1.917.934.aapp, robsherman, ifette, +1.202.637.aaqq, justin, vinay, +1.917.318.aarr, NAI_Charlie, +1.866.317.aass, Chris_Mejia, 17:23:52 ... +1.202.346.aatt, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, +1.202.744.aavv, hwest, Chapell, +1.202.326.aaww, +1.813.366.aaxx, +1.813.366.aayy, tl, +1.310.392.aazz, alex, 1.202.587.aaee, 17:23:56 ... +1.206.369.bbaa, +49.721.913.74.bbbb, dsriedel, tedleung, johnsimpson, +1.202.684.bbcc, jmayer, vincent, +1.301.270.bbdd, jchester2 17:23:57 -schunter 17:24:01 -jchester2 17:24:03 -bilcorry 17:24:04 -rvaneijk 17:24:13 rrsagent, draft minutes 17:24:13 I have made the request to generate http://www.w3.org/2012/04/18-dnt-minutes.html ifette 17:24:35 (for whatever reason, rrsagent seems to get a more complete list if you do list participants first, no idea why...) 17:24:48 ifette, that's the Zakim bug I was referring to earlier 17:24:56 robsherman has joined #dnt 17:25:01 or at least related to that bug 17:25:16 robsherman has left #dnt 17:25:22 -??P73 17:28:12 enewland has joined #dnt 17:28:25 -npdoty 17:28:41 -KevinT 17:35:00 disconnecting the lone participant, WileyS, in T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM 17:35:01 T&S_Track(dnt)12:00PM has ended 17:35:01 Attendees were +1.408.674.aaaa, aleecia, +31.65.141.aabb, rvaneijk, +1.408.223.aacc, bilcorry, +1.714.852.aadd, fielding, npdoty, +1.202.587.aaee, +1.415.520.aaff, KevinT, 17:35:01 ... +1.415.520.aagg, +1.727.686.aahh, schunter, +1.202.370.aaii, +1.408.349.aajj, WileyS, +1.727.686.aakk, +1.202.326.aall, +1.301.270.aamm, +1.202.370.aann, +1.510.501.aaoo, 17:35:03 ... +1.917.934.aapp, robsherman, ifette, +1.202.637.aaqq, justin, vinay, +1.917.318.aarr, NAI_Charlie, +1.866.317.aass, Chris_Mejia, +1.202.346.aatt, [Microsoft], +1.202.684.aauu, 17:35:06 ... +1.202.744.aavv, hwest, Chapell, +1.202.326.aaww, +1.813.366.aaxx, +1.813.366.aayy, tl, +1.310.392.aazz, alex, 1.202.587.aaee, +1.206.369.bbaa, +49.721.913.74.bbbb, dsriedel, 17:35:09 ... tedleung, johnsimpson, +1.202.684.bbcc, jmayer, vincent, +1.301.270.bbdd, jchester2 17:36:08 KevinT1 has left #dnt 17:55:28 mischat has joined #dnt 17:57:56 mischat_ has joined #dnt 18:31:38 ifette has joined #dnt 18:39:57 ifette has joined #dnt 19:28:05 tl1 has joined #dnt 19:33:07 tl has joined #dnt 19:55:36 ifette has joined #dnt