Fwd: [soac-mapo] RE: Initial Draft ToR for Recommendation 6 Implementation Discussion
<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Chuck,</div><div><br></div><div>I'm good with all the edits in the attached version. I think they add to the clarity of the document.</div><div><br></div><div>I question use of the word 'preserving' in this sentence: <font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial"><i>"preserving the.................universal resolvability of the DNS (as noted in Recommendation 4)."</i></font></div><!--StartFragment--> <!--EndFragment--> <div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; "><br></span></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Arial">I don't think there's universal resolvability of the DNS today. For example, I don't think .TW names resolve in the PRC. As preserve means to 'keep unchanged' I don't think we can preserve something that doesn't exist. </font><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; ">Also, I don't see specific reference to 'universal resolvability' in GNSO Recommendation 4. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; "><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; ">I think a better word than 'preserving' is 'maximizing'. i think 'maximizing' also works well with the additional concepts introduced in Milton's version of the sentence.</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; "><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; ">RT </span></div><div> </div><div><br></div><div></div></body></html> Attachment:
Rec6 WG Terms of Reference-RG-edits+Aug 21 ver.doc <html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div></div><br><div><br></div><div><br><div>Begin forwarded message:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>From: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">Avri Doria <<a href="mailto:avri@xxxxxxx";>avri@xxxxxxx</a>><br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Date: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;">August 20, 2010 6:46:23 PM EDT<br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>To: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;"><a href="mailto:soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx";>soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx</a><br></span></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px;"><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium; color:rgba(0, 0, 0, 1);"><b>Subject: </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium;"><b>Re: [soac-mapo] RE: Initial Draft ToR for Recommendation 6 Implementation Discussion</b><br></span></div><br><div><br>On 20 Aug 2010, at 15:06, Robin Gross wrote:<br><br><blockquote type="cite"><Rec6 WG Terms of Reference-RG-edits.doc><br></blockquote><br>I essentially support this formulation with the edits done before me by Milton and Robin, though I do have some questions about other content of the ToR.<br><br>- i question whether it is possible to find an appropriate solution without revisiting and possibly revising the understanding of policy recommendation 6. I also question to what extent one can separate implementation from policy. We see them as separate because the volunteer group does policy and the paid staff does the implementation. But as anyone who have ever done and implementation of any policy or design knows, it is impossible to do just implementation without making many, sometime minor sometime major, policy interpretations and decisions along the way. Hence the need to review implementation for their faithfulness to the original policy/design. Implementation experience also must be allowed to affect policy. And if the only reasonable implementation of a policy is something that most cannot accept, then perhaps the original recommendation was the problem and should be reconsidered.<br><br>- The report section needed a statement on the possibility of minority reports. I added one.<br><br>- The one question that is not answered. who is chartering this group GAC+ALAC+GNSO or the Board? It seems that this ToR is setup to report directly to the Board? Is this the intention. Does the Board need to review or endorse the ToR? Or did they empower the 3 chairs and the group in formation with the ability to approve its own ToR?<br><br>Also did a few editorials.<br><br><br>thanks<br><br>a.<br><br><br><br><br></div></blockquote></div><br></body></html>
|