Bob Helfant has asked me to redirect this to the list, as he can't post to
it at the moment.
Antony
>
>When did PAB's single function of advising POC change to "oversight of
>CORE" or make decisions that could "result in some CORE registrars going
>out of business"?
>
>Bob Helfant
>GLobeComm, Inc.
>
>At 08:26 AM 12/18/97 -0800, Kent Crispin wrote:
>>[This is a little long. But the issues are complicated...]
>
>>Second, since one of the primary purposes of PAB is oversight of the
>>CORE registrars (a largely commercial group), it is especially
>>important that PAB remain aloof from any improper entanglement with
>>CORE.
>>
>>However, the issue of conflict of interest vis a vis CORE oversight is
>>a totally different matter, and, IMO, the IETF does not provide a good
>>model. PAB is essentially part of a regulatory framework. Its
>>primary responsibility, therefore, is to the "public", not to CORE.
>>For example, PAB may be called upon to make decisions that could
>>result in some CORE registrars going out of business. A registrar
>>with lots of money (say that NSI signed the MoU, for example) could
>>sway PAB (or POC) in lots of subtle ways, not only with respect to
>>issues with the public, but with respect to issues dealing with other
>>registrars.
>