IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Transition

Carl Malamud <carl@malamud.com> Mon, 09 November 1992 14:46 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15376; 9 Nov 92 9:46 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15367; 9 Nov 92 9:46 EST
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26096; 9 Nov 92 9:47 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15362; 9 Nov 92 9:46 EST
Received: from trystero.malamud.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26082; 9 Nov 92 9:47 EST
Received: by malamud.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA21954; Mon, 9 Nov 92 09:53:07 EST
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 1992 09:53:07 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Carl Malamud <carl@malamud.com>
Message-Id: <9211091453.AA21954@malamud.com>
To: Stef=poised@nma.com, crocker@tis.com
Subject: Re: Transition
Cc: poised@CNRI.Reston.VA.US

Stef -

You're taking the easy way out again.  You keep referring to the
indeterminate conspiracy of shadowy figures that are ISOC (pardon
the poetic license) and stressing that "they" must somehow do
something to make us comfortable with their organization.

Steve and I raised the issue of ISOC structure and identified
several elements that we felt were crucial: open meetings, elections,
etc...  It is our strong belief that these changes make ISOC the
kind of organization that we would feel comfortable working within.

Are there any *specific* aspects of ISOC you are uncomfortable with
that we did not get into our draft?  If so, let's get them on the
table.

Carl

v2.27.6 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status