RE: [ga] Re: Board descisions

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@verisign.com>]

In my own opinion as I have expressed individually and in public meetings
here in Melbourne, Dave is correct in his conclusion that the real choices
are between the two agreements.  For those that insist this is a
policy/process issue, is 30 days not an adequate amount of time for review
and comment?

Chuck Gomes

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Crocker [mailto:dhc2@dcrocker.net]
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 8:04 PM
To: Patrick Greenwell
Cc: Jonathan Weinberg; svl@nrw.net; svl@nrw.net;
apisan@servidor.unam.mx; Amadeu@nominalia.com; karl@CaveBear.com;
jcohen@shapirocohen.com; phil.davidson@bt.com; f.fitzsimmons@att.net;
ken.fockler@sympatico.ca; mkatoh@wdc.fujitsu.com;
mkatoh@wdc.fujitsu.com; hans@icann.org; shkyong@kgsm.kaist.ac.kr;
andy@ccc.de; junsec@wide.ad.jp; quaynor@ghana.com; roberts@icann.org;
helmut.schink@icn.siemens.de; linda@icann.org; vint cerf; ga@dnso.org;
ecdiscuss@ec-pop.org; core@corenic.org
Subject: Re: [ga] Re: Board descisions


At 11:49 AM 3/12/2001, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > It is the failure to consider the actual merits of the proposed
contract,
>
>No, quite simply it is a failure to consider including the DNSO in
>significant and widespread policy decisions that got us here today. Since
>this was not done, it is only proper and appropriate to allow the DNSO
>time to contemplate this situation and respond appropriately.


Verisign made clear that a failure to ratify the new proposed contract, by 
the drop dead date they stated, will mean that they will implement the 
existing contract.

We can all continue to complain, but it will just run the clock out, to the 
deadline, and the community will then have to live with the existing 
contract.  Constant complaining has a peculiar kind of ego satisfaction, 
allowing us all to feel wonderfully self-righteous.

But it is not at all productive.

If the community benefits are better for the existing contract than for the 
proposed one, then fine.

My own impression is that the proposed contract embodies a superior set of 
trade-offs.  It is vastly imperfect, of course, and carries probable 
downsides, but appears to define a more balanced relationship than the 
current contract.

d/

----------
Dave Crocker   <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking   <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel: +1.408.246.8253;   fax: +1.408.273.6464

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html