[CWG-Stewardship] RZERC Charter for CWG review

[Gomes, Chuck]

I wonder if we should let the numbers and protocol communities decide how they would like this to happen.

Chuck

-----Original Message-----
From: cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org [mailto:cwg-stewardship-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Mueller, Milton L
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2016 9:53 PM
To: Andrew Sullivan; cwg-stewardship at icann.org
Subject: Re: [CWG-Stewardship] RZERC Charter for CWG review



> -----Original Message-----
> Given that the whole thing just advises the Board and can be 
> reconstituted later if need be, I'm not too exercised about including 
> a reasonably wide group of people.  Also, of course, we should hope 
> that the sorts of innovations that might involve this group would be 
> relatively rare.  But, for instance, there's current work afoot to 
> rename all the root servers to give a little more room in the DNS 
> priming query; and I'd like to believe that we all think maximal co- 
> operation in making those sorts of changes is the sort of thing we can count on.

Yes, absolutely, any major change in the names RZ operations needs to have input from numbers and the IETF. I have no problem with broader inclusion within the committee.  I do, however, want to see the remit of this committee clearly restricted to the names. It seemed to me from the initial reading that there was still confusion about this (and these concerns were amply borne out).

--MM
_______________________________________________
CWG-Stewardship mailing list
CWG-Stewardship at icann.org
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cwg-stewardship