Re: [ifwp] Re: Questions about Ira's deadline

[Jay Fenello <Jay@Iperdome.com>]

At 06:41 PM 9/13/98 , Jim Dixon wrote:
>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.  


Hi Jim,

I think you've misunderstood my approach.

I am not suggesting that Boston is the "wrap-up"
meeting.  I am only suggesting that we use it to 
draft a set of corporate documents based on the 
*previous* IFWP consensus points.

These do not need to be exact or final, as they 
will never be implemented!  They only exist as a 
lever to give the IFWP a voice in the process.

Under this scenario, the IANA would then need
to negotiate with the IFWP just like they are
negotiating with NSI, CIX and AIM. 


Regards,

Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.  
404-250-3242  http://www.iperdome.com

=====================================================================
 ISPF, The Forum for ISPs by ISPs.  October 26-28, 1998, Atlanta, GA.
 Three days of clues, news, and views from the industry's best and
 brightest. http://www.ispf.com/ for information and registration.
=====================================================================