Re: PAB Should we speak?

Mark Measday (
Sat, 04 Jul 1998 16:43:15 +0100

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

In reference to Mr Crispin's request, I thought your clever idea was to
let IFWP friends reinvent the work the POC/CORE people did so well so that
the participants could feel the necessary levels of ownership and
inclusion to allow the process to progress. Hence, I heard it
hypothesised, the silence and the contented wait, due to the fact that
there isn't any way to allocate a global resource other than by
consultation with the interested parties, whose predictable interests will
lead to a predicated result. I hope you planned the clever dénouement,



Kent Crispin wrote:

> Folks, I have forwarded some messages to the PAB list expressing
> concerns about the "IFWP process". Those are my personal
> expressions, of course, and are not meant to express the sentiment of
> PAB.
> But I am curious to know what the sentiment of PAB is. The Green
> Paper and the White Paper have effectively blocked the MoU from
> progressing, and, as has been expressed several times, we are thrown
> back in time a year and a half. Probably within the next six months a
> new IANA will be formed, and then a "names council" (Jon Postel's
> term), and then at some point some new TLDs will be added. This new
> structure will almost certainly incorporate elements of the the MoU,
> since the MoU basically covered a lot of the ground pretty well.
> PAB is the body that most directly represents the 200 odd signatories
> of the MoU -- POC and CORE cannot make that claim -- and an official
> PAB position potentially carries significant weight.
> The question: is there an interest in PAB in forming a position on
> the matter of the "new IANA"? A collective PAB position could be very
> influential: the list of MoU signatories is an impressive list.
> I honestly have no particular ax to grind in this matter -- I will,
> as always, express my personal opinions in various places. But I
> think the collective voice of those who have supported the MoU should
> have an opportunity to be heard, if it wishes to speak.
> Comments, please.
> --
> Kent Crispin, PAB Chair "No reason to get excited",
> the thief he kindly spoke...
> PGP fingerprint: B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44 61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55



UK tel/fax: 0044.181.747.9167/mobile 0044.370.947.420 France tel/fax: 0033.450.20.94.92/0033.450.20.94.93 Switzerland tel/fax: 0041.22.733.01.13 Email: Web: ______________________________________________

--------------9E7BE90FDE67EB6D0D76DC42 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Mark Measday Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"

begin: vcard fn: Mark Measday n: Measday;Mark email;internet: x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard