<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant issue
- To: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] Single Registrant issue
- From: Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:49:40 +0200
A very reasonable position IMO Roberto, thanks for clarifying.
BTW, I thought that the idea of a sub-group on SR had been floated. Is that
something that's still in the works?
Stéphane
Le 14 avr. 2010 à 13:46, Roberto Gaetano a écrit :
>
> Avri:
>
>> I have been clear about thinking that this issue is not
>> precluded from our charter. And I believe that many other
>> people have followed a similar line of reasoning no matter
>> what their specific view on the subject.
>>
>> But if someone is going to keep making what I believe is a
>> disruptive claim that something is out of scope, we better
>> deal with that issue. Basically the chairs need to let us or
>> CORE know so that we do not need to be continually the
>> recipients of a backhanded reprimand from CORE on this issue.
>
> I thought I have expressed my thoughts in a sufficiently clear way, so
> unless my co-chair has a different view we will accept discussion points
> related to SR, as well as points that are orthogonal to it.
>
> I am sure that SR is not the only subject that one or more WG members would
> not like to see discussed. My take is that, while there is no obligation to
> contribute for who does not want to, there is no reason for stopping the
> others from discussing it.
>
> Cheers,
> Roberto
>
>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|