[Internal-cg] Timeline and proposal finalization process updates
Milton L Mueller
mueller at syr.edu
Tue Feb 24 21:20:51 UTC 2015
I agree with Michael – Daniel’s proposed statement is a highly prescriptive form of advice that effectively takes sides in ongoing controversies within the CWG about transition models.
I am not sure whether the addition that you propose - although factually correct - could not be interpreted as inappropriately prescriptive through the backdoor.
On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Daniel Karrenberg <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net<mailto:daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net>> wrote:
I also propose to add this to what we say: "The time that the ICG will need to produce its output will be shortest if the CWG response is simple, has little or no dependencies on other work and is compatible with the responses already received from the protocol parameters and numbers communities."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg