Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Discussion

["Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <rod@cyberspaces.org>]

I think this is a good idea since we might accomplish something on the IDNH issue.

 

In addition, could someone summarize what was decided, if anything, as a result of the NC teleconference. I have read conflicting statements about might have been decided concerning this WG.

 

thanks,

 

Rod

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Babybows.com

To: wg-review@dnso.org

Sent: Saturday, January 27, 2001 7:47 AM

Subject: Re: [wg-review] 3. [Constituencies] Discussion

In an earlier post Greg has written, “Because the IDNH question has been broken out and the motion passed by this WG to create a working group on the topic has been presented to the NC, I believe it would be more fruitful at this time to leave this out of the discussion”.  If the NC has acted favorably upon the motion, I would agree; please advise – has the NC taken any action in this regard?  If not, may we proceed to discussion of IDNH?