Re: DNSO Working Group methods [WAS Re: [discuss] Unofficial minutes June 11 1999 Names Council Meeting]

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Michael and all,

Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:

> [Let's do something about those subject lines]

  Good suggestion, and one that has already been made I believe.  >;)

>
>
> Personally, I think the IETF would make an excellent model.

  Personally I strongly disagree.  The IETF model is already beginning to
deteriorate in the rapid expansion of the Internet, and is in serious
jeopardy or becoming less and less relevant to the standards or
perceived standards of the internet today.  Their "Working Group"
approach has been beneficial in the past, but as time passes and the
expansion of the internet continues, their impact in their current
use of "Working group" formats, is beginning to falter as to their
influence on the protocol development and other areas of internet
structure.  Therefore a new format needs to be developed.

>
>
> On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Kent Crispin wrote:
> [...]
> > In the meantime, could you comment on why you think that IETF
> > proceedures for Working Groups are not appropriate for the DNSO?  Or
> > do you think they could be adapted for such use, and if so, what
> > changes would be necessary?
> >
> >
>
> --
> A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
> U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
> +1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
>                     -->   It's hot here.   <--

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208