RE: [council] Response to case for reform - TOR

[tony.ar.holmes@bt.com]

Philip/All
Just one brief comment on the proposed TORs.

Under item 2 you have 'merger of ASO/PSO'.
I struggle to understand how Stuart Lynn's proposal does that, particularly
as it appears that 3 out of the 4 current members of the PSO disappear of
the chart! 
Whether you agree with that is a separate issue.

Whilst the ASO appears to be absorbed into the Address & Numbering Council
and the IAB appear in the ANPC and the TAC the other parties don't. 

I also struggle with the concept that the 3 support organisations 'CHANGE'
to 3 Policy Councils. To my mind they are REPLACED by 3 Policy Councils as
the make up of the constituent parts of these are totally different.

Therefore I would suggest that the points;
- change of 3 Supporting Organisations to 3 Policy Councils
- merger of ASO/PSO
are amended to:
- 'Replacement of ASO, PSO & DNSO with Policy Councils', or alternatively
list each existing SO as a separate item in the ToRs.

Regards
Tony

-----Original Message-----
From: philip.sheppard@aim.be [mailto:philip.sheppard@aim.be]
Sent: 14 March 2002 14:45
To: council@dnso.org
Subject: [council] Response to case for reform - TOR


In order to structure our work to respond to the proposal "Case for reform"
please find attached proposed terms of reference for the work ahead. This
has been informally seen various NC members present on the last day of
meetings in Ghana. 
 
In order not to waste time on our first call please consider this proposal
now and make comment by e-mail. I would like to have the agreement of the NC
to terms of reference BEFORE the teleconference next week. Our first act
would be to vote to agree on terms of reference in the first few minutes of
that call. Many thanks for your coooperation to achieve this goal.
Philip
NC Chair