[gnso-rds-pdp-wg] authoritative

[Greg Aaron]

Regarding "authoritative": the solution is not to avoid a word because someone might possibly have another idea of what it means.  A solution is for the WG to settle on definitions and then use the words consistently.  That's what engineers and policy-makers do all the time in RFCs, and papers like SAC051 (which gave us some foundational terms), and WG reports.   

All best,
--Greg



-----Original Message-----
From: gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org [mailto:gnso-rds-pdp-wg-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Rob Golding
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 7:31 AM
To: Gnso-rds-pdp Wg <gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [gnso-rds-pdp-wg] authoritative

> By Authoritative are we meaning that

Canonical ?
Received ?
Central ?
Aggregated ?

> I thought the recommendation was that we weren't meaning _anything_, 
> and that we just weren't going to use the term.

Yes.

Rob
_______________________________________________
gnso-rds-pdp-wg mailing list
gnso-rds-pdp-wg at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rds-pdp-wg