<p dir="ltr">Sent from my LG G4<br>
Kindly excuse brevity and typos<br>
On 6 Apr 2016 8:32 p.m., "Mueller, Milton L" <<a href="mailto:milton@gatech.edu">milton@gatech.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> SO: At least for numbers, what ICANN does also exceeds just the IFO role as it also approves/ratifies global policies et all.<br>
><br>
> MM: correct. But that is not what the current language says.<br>
><br>
SO: Well it seem to me that the word "coordinates" encompasses all that and it further enumerates what the coordination entails in 1.1aiii(A and B) No?</p>
<p dir="ltr">> I think if they indeed decides to sign with someone else in future, then the existing governing documents will need to be updated one way or the other anyway so I don't see it as a significant issue<br>
><br>
> MM: wrong. It will be extremely difficult to amend the articles and there is no reason to put in place now basic articles of incorporation that are not correct.<br>
><br>
SO: But really Prof, you are saying this should be updated now because the article will be difficult to update in future even though what you propose will not be the status post transition (assuming the DUO sign with ICANN).</p>
<p dir="ltr">I just don't agree with the logic. Nevertheless, it's up to the respective communities to decide but I will just warn against too much modification of the intent our the proposal.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Regards</p>