RE: [soac-mapo] Update- Rec6 Action Item URGENT input from CWG is required by January 7th 2011.
- To: Evan Leibovitch <evan@xxxxxxxxx>, Richard Tindal <richardtindal@xxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [soac-mapo] Update- Rec6 Action Item URGENT input from CWG is required by January 7th 2011.
- From: Milton L Mueller <mueller@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2011 22:31:03 -0500
Agree with Evan.
From: owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx [owner-soac-mapo@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Evan
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2011 8:51 PM
To: Richard Tindal
Cc: Robin Gross; Cheryl Langdon-Orr; soac-mapo; Chuck Gomes; Heather.Dryden
Dryden; Frank March; Van Gelder Stéphane; Jon Nevett; Neuman Jeff; Kurt Pritz;
Subject: Re: [soac-mapo] Update- Rec6 Action Item URGENT input from CWG is
required by January 7th 2011.
I disagree thoroughly. The IO is integral to many of the objections to the
status quo. Glossing over them at this point does not address such this
fundamental problem and leaves it to fester.
Part of the reason we are here, dealing with this core issue so late in the TLD
process, is because of previous tendencies to sweep contentious issues under
the rug in the name of expediency, hoping that in the future they'll be
forgotten or just bullied past. I prefer to learn from mistakes rather than
This issue will not magically just go away through one more deferment.
On 2 January 2011 18:17, Richard Tindal
I think our current mission is to address the three items in the Board's
Cartagena resolution (per Margie's 24 Dec note).
IO wasn't one of them, so I propose we leave any revisiting of that issue to
the end of our discussions.