Re: [council] suggested draft resolution for today's NC call

[KathrynKL@aol.com]

<< 
 Therefore we should at least prepare 2-3 alternatives with all of their 
 advantages and disadvantages. This does not have to be a long paper (the 
 Board could just as well read the WG-C report and I bet some have even done 
 so ;-) >>

I agree with Michael, as I understand his comments.  I think the role of the 
Names Council is to hold a public comment period, and then review and 
summarize the comments, and any realistic alternatives and options they 
provide.  That is our "value added" -- to include with the WG report the 
comments and views of the entire DNSO and our views (as NC).

BTW, I think our report should really apply only to WG-C.  WG-C was a formal 
report; WG-B was only a status and informal report.  Today, WG-B has a formal 
report which is ready to go out on public notice for public comments.  When 
this comment period is finished, then, as with WG-C, the NC should write a 
report as well.

regards, kathy