[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ifwp] Re: Questions about Ira's deadline
On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Jay Fenello wrote:
> Our strongest play for Boston is to prepare a set of
> Articles and By-Laws consistent with the IFWP consensus
> points, and a slate of Directors for the New Corp.
I have to disagree. The meeting in Boston on 19 September was
planned as an IFWP meeting and people are going there to attend
an IFWP meeting. It is too late for this to be an IFWP wrap-up
meeting. However, as I have already pointed out, it would be
quite useful as a planning session for a real wrap-up meeting,
possibly one in the following week in LA.
> To summarize, many of the largest IFWP organizations
> (i.e. NSI, CIX, AIM, Educause) have abandoned IFWP to
> negotiate directly with the IANA. Whether this was by
> choice (CIX) or necessity (NSI) is beside the point.
This is over the top. NSI has agreed to come to a wrap-up
meeting. It is my understanding that they are also willing to
come to Boston. The CIX has said that they will attend a wrap-up
meeting so long as everyone is there. AIM's declaration was ambiguous,
but similar to the CIX's.
Most of the supporters of the IFWP are quite willing to participate
in a wrap-up meeting, so long as it is NOT a splinter meeting.
The primary attraction of the IFWP has been in fact that it is
universal, that it brings in all parties. We need to maintain
its universality. That is what has drawn people into this
process, and that is our greatest strength. This is no time to
try to convert the IFWP into a forum for narrow interests.
--
Jim Dixon Managing Director
VBCnet GB Ltd http://www.vbc.net tel +44 117 929 1316
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member of Council Telecommunications Director
Internet Services Providers Association EuroISPA EEIG
http://www.ispa.org.uk http://www.euroispa.org
tel +44 171 976 0679 tel +32 2 503 22 65
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy