[governance] oversight stmt

[McTim]

AD,

On 9/29/05, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Actually I have two reasons:
>
> In a sense what i tried to put in the text was nothing that would
> make someone want to balk.  So yes, it may be a minimal agreeable
> position (with a few abstentions), but it was the best I could pull
> off under these time constraints.  This does not mean that I don't
> see reason to further develop our position.  It is not like the
> dialogue will finish tomorrow or the day after.  As it is, I think we
> have the beginnings of what might a good middle way - between the
> model 1/3 fans and the 'no change ever ever' folks.


1. Many Thanks and well done on the potential compromise position.

2. I don't think there is anyone in the caucus who stands for "no
change ever ever"

In my industry, we adapt or die. IG is constantly evolving. An example
of this is this week's traffic from ARIN PPML.

BTW, where do you stand on IPv6 PI?

--
Cheers,

McTim
nic-hdl:      TMCG

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance