On Mon, Jun 01, 1998 at 01:19:21PM -0400, Bob Helfant wrote:
> I find the part about IANA currently having control over all TLDs a little
> out of line.
OK. I'm not going to change it, though -- I think it's basically a
semantic issue about what you mean by "control": a bank president
controls the opening of the vault, except when a robber holds a gun
to his head.
> I have signed the orginal MoU and didn't have to agree to
> that statement.
As I hope I made clear, signing this paper explicitly has no legally
binding implications. So you can sign this one without having to
worry that there may be some clause that you don't agree with.
It is clearly not true, or CORE would have its 7 TLDs in
> the root by now. Are you really asking people to sign this or are you
> looking for concencus and/or suggestions to release this statement as an
> MoU lite?
I am not looking for people to sign it yet -- we need to set up a mechanism
for that, anyway. At this point I would like to get consensus from
PAB that this is an adequate document to proceed with.
Please also bear in mind the following VERY IMPORTANT FACT:
Since this document is explicitly non-binding we can adjust
it later.
Why, then, have a document at all? Because PAB *does vote*, and we
want to have some kind of membership mechanism that gives us a way to
check the bona fides of the signatories. We don't want 300 AOL email
addresses to show up on day one.
This matter of the vote is very important -- PAB will nominate and
vote on POC members, and thus we do have a concern about election
fraud.
-- Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55 http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:30 PST