Re: [council] Review Working Group

[Dany Vandromme <vandrome@renater.fr>]

On Thu, 30 Nov 2000, Philip Sheppard wrote:

> YJ,
> I do not mean to delay your plans - I just see there is uncertainty in the
> minds of NC members and we need to be clear about the path we follow. We
> should not go public until we are clear about our objectives.
> 
> - Caroline's e-mail shows that her original proposal is different to the
> path you are following.
> - The objective of the proposed new WG is unclear.
> - The NC has not had an opportunity to discuss the issue.
> 
> We can do all this December 19.
-
We really need to do so Philip. I do not find the proposed WG unclear at
all. I am ready to support the discussion about that in the next NC
meeting, but to me it seems really important to get DNSO people. I would
invite ccTLD constituency in particular expressing their own view about
that, but also GA contributions will be more than welcome. Final decision
will be to decide whether the WG will include the TF or the opposite!
I think that the voice of a WG is far more representative than any subset
of the NC! I am obviously in favor of the democratic way.
So let's spend some time for conclusive matter at the next NC meeting.
Dany
-
> 
> Philip.
> 
> 
> 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------