[CRISP-TEAM] Letter to ICG May 6
Kivuva at transworldafrica.com
Thu May 7 09:07:57 CEST 2015
On 7 May 2015 at 04:09, Bill Woodcock <woody at pch.net> wrote:
> My view is that we should encourage the ICG (and NTIA) to stick to the
> agreed-upon timeline, as applied to the Numbers (and presumably Protocol)
> communities, and free the Names community to arrive at the best possible
> conclusion, in their own time. As it is, they're under artificial and
> unnecessary pressure to come to a hasty conclusion, in order to meet the
> timeline we did. That seems to me to be bad for both them, and for us,
> while being completely artificial and unnecessary.
I tend to believe "work expands so as to fill the time available for its
completion". I agree the timelines should be adhered to. But the names
community too should be encouraged, or even compelled to complete on time,
least they go on forever. I am not sure as a separate community if we
should be discussing this though. We can leave it for ICG, and the names
community to decide.
> I hope that the ICG will move forward by asking NTIA to transition the
> Numbers and Protocols portions of the IANA functions on the agreed-to
> timeline, while allowing Names to define their own timeline.
While this is a valid point, I wonder how ICG can ensure a consistent
proposal combining the three communities unless the final proposals are
availed and analysed together. I guess there are transition parameters that
have to be in sync.
> 2/3 Success!!!
Mwendwa Kivuva, Nairobi, Kenya
"There are some men who lift the age they inhabit, till all men walk on
higher ground in that lifetime." - Maxwell Anderson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the CRISP