ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[soac-mapo]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

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 
Leibovitch [evan@xxxxxxxxx]
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 St├ęphane; Jon Nevett; Neuman Jeff; Kurt Pritz; 
Margie Milam
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 
repeat them.

This issue will not magically just go away through one more deferment.

- Evan



On 2 January 2011 18:17, Richard Tindal 
<richardtindal@xxxxxx<mailto:richardtindal@xxxxxx>> wrote:
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.

Richard






<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy