John C Klensin wrote:
>
> Kent,
>
> FWIW at this late hour...
>
> I think the PAB should say something. The alternative is
> to join the ranks of groups that can't agree on anything
> and are hence doomed to be completely ineffectual in this
> arena. I think your note is a very good example of
> "something", and is consistent with a long series of
> general PAB positions. And, perhaps like Bill, I see some
> worthwhile ideas in some of the alternate proposals and
> suggestions, but they are things I'd like brought to the
> early attention of the new board rather than things I find
> "compelling" (the latter often has the semantics of
> "important enough to hold things up while we try to resolve
> or fix", and I don't think that is the case.
>
> So, as far as I'm concerned (mostly as an individual --
> this note has not been reviewed within MCI WorldCom), ship
> it. Don't let a quibble about a phrase commenting on
> proposals we are not endorsing turn into a roadblock.
Completely agree with John. Go for it, Kent.
(Even if I, as John, have not yet consulted this with MCI WorldCom ;-))
Amadeu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 30 2000 - 03:22:36 PST