Re: David's comments

"Vinton G. Cerf" <vcerf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Tue, 01 December 1992 12:59 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01612; 1 Dec 92 7:59 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01601; 1 Dec 92 7:59 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04400; 1 Dec 92 8:00 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01590; 1 Dec 92 7:59 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa04363; 1 Dec 92 7:59 EST
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01584; 1 Dec 92 7:58 EST
To: Stef=poised@nma.com
cc: Carl Malamud <malamud@csn.org>, poised@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: David's comments
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 01 Dec 92 01:07:46 PST." <18743.723200866@nma.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 1992 07:58:29 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Vinton G. Cerf" <vcerf@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Message-ID: <9212010758.aa01584@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US>

Stef,

I forwarded David Brandin's note to the Poised list after asking
David if his message could be shared more widely. It seemed to me
that the WG members should be kept informed of the various inputs
that are coming to the isoc trustees regarding poised. I agree with
Carl's observation that David's reactions may have been in large
measure the result of misunderstanding the list of agreed points
as a detailed set of bylaws or procedures. 

We've come a long way in the last several months - and we still
have a good deal of work to do to put the agreement we have
in principle into a form we can act on. 

Vint