RE: [council] Alternate Root paper by Grant
I am somewhat suprised by this document, particularly because it is now
published, while I, a member of the committee, have not even seen it prior
to its publication.
(perhaps I missed some e-mail in my recent travel to Africa
The document, which was to have been a "briefing", immediately goes into
"Possible Policy Directions".
My understanding when I proposed the motion was that "Policy" and "Call to
Action" would not be inserted into the "briefing"
Perhaps I was voted down on this?
Could we have some technical overview (simple language and short) on the
means used to bypass or "augment" ICANN TLD name resolution such as browser
based installable software, and other techniques which may de-stablise user
workstations or name service?
Finally, since the document mentions new.net I would like to see a note in
there that new.net will present a short formal paper to the NC (or the
committee) explaining their position and plan, and intentions towards ICANN.
peter de Blanc
From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2001 5:40 AM
Subject: [council] Alternate Root paper by Grant
Grant' document has been added on the web site, and is now referenced
in the NC Stockholm agenda:
3. Authoratative and experimental roots - presentation on the policy
aspects of the issue Grant Forsyth (15 mins)