<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [council] Statement of work for working group on reserved names - DRAFT for Council
two comments after a quick review -
a) Prior to any discussion of (iv) and (v)WG should have discussion
and make precedent recommendations regarding whether or not there is
any merit in a) adding new names to existing reservations lists, b)
taking names off of existing reservations lists and c) whether or not
reservations lists, in general, are appropriate policy to continue
forward with.
b) voting should probably be along constituency lines - i.e. one vote
per constituency. I don't think each constituency should be required
to appoint three members to this TF just to ensure it gets the full
defensive benefit of having three full votes. This can be avoided by
simply having one vote per constituency.
-r
On 11-Jan-07, at 5:52 PM, Marilyn Cade wrote:
<DraftStatementofWorkforWorkingGrouponReservedNames.doc>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|