Re: [council] [Clarification] Review Working Group

[Dany Vandromme <vandrome@renater.fr>]

I do support YJ's proposal
We should agree on the overal agenda and get things started from a
decision of the next NC meeting (see the IC deadline)
Dany


On Thu, 23 Nov 2000, YJ Park wrote:

> Hello Caroline, Peter, Erica, Dany and all,
> 
> Sorries for my belated response this time. After MdR meeting,
> I have been worn out and it took quite time to come back.:-)
> 
> In MdR, Ken and I talked about this a bit more and agreed that
> the details of this "Review Working Group" should be elaborated
> by myself and finalized.
> 
> Let me briefly describe right now and more detailed plans are
> expected to be developed within the Working Group later.
> 
> 1) how Review Working Group is composed of
> 2) the Scope of Review WG
> 3) Timeframe of Review WG and
> 4) how this group is going to work with Review TF and NC.
> 
> =======================
> Review Working Group, WG F
> =======================
> 
> 1. Call for participation through 7 constituencies and GA
> 
> Hope this WG can be inclusive as much as posible for the balanced
> recommendations.
> 
> Call for election for co-working group chair among members
> as soon as this group is in place.
> 
> 2. Scope of WG
> 
> 1st Stage: This Working Group can start from answering to the Review
>                 TF's questionaire which was presented to the Board.
> 
> 2 nd Stage: Call for DNSO recommendation paper.
> 
> 3 rd Stage: Take a voting process to adopt the WG's position paper
>                   which will be presented to the NC.
> 
> 3. Timeframe of Review WG
> 
> Nov. 27 - open end : Call for Participation in this WG
> Dec. 4 : WG Charter Discussion
> Dec. 11 : WG Charter Finalization
> Dec. 11 - Jan.? : WG's Interim Report during Jan's NC teleconference
> Jan.?  - Feb ? : WG's Interim Report during Feb's NC teleconference
> March Melbourne Meeting: Submission to NC as WG's position
>                                            under assumption that it can find
> consensus.
> 
> 4. The relationship with Review TF and NC
> 
> Review WG and Review TF and NC:
> 
> Since WG is within DNSO and TF is within NC, it is desirable
> for two groups to exchange views and info to achieve their goals
> as each input channel to NC and and advisory body to the NC.
> ==========================================
> 
> If you have any comment on this, please do so.
> If we can reach an agreement as soon as possible, as it is put here,
> this WG can start from Nov. 27.
> 
> Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
> YJ
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dany VANDROMME                    |  Directeur du GIP RENATER

                Reseau National de Telecommunications 
         pour la Technologie, l'Enseignement et la Recherche

                                  |  ENSAM
Tel   :  +33 (0)1 53 94 20 30     |  151 Boulevard de l'Hopital
Fax   :  +33 (0)1 53 94 20 31     |  75013 Paris
E-mail: Dany.Vandromme@renater.fr |  FRANCE
--------------------------------------------------------------------