[Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
Wed Oct 1 07:46:17 UTC 2014
While I generally agree that we do not need to provide definitions as a matter of course we do have to avoid confusion in our use of terms. Is there a belief that people would be unclear as to what we mean by IANA functions? There have been issues of functions that are specified in the contract or not. While our RFP does reference similar terms I am not sure that they are defined. That might be the role of an FAQ...
----- Original Message -----
From: paf at frobbit.se
To: kuoweiwu at gmail.com
Cc: internal-cg at icann.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 12:46:52 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [Internal-cg] ICG FAQ ..
On 1 okt 2014, at 06:23, Patrik Fältström wrote: > Personally, I do not think we need to add definitions. It adds to the confusion. My apologies for not being more clear... Reason for this is that we already have an agreed to text in the RFP we have submitted. As Milton said on the call, we should have simple answers to simple repeated questions. Regarding "what is IANA", maybe we should just remove the question? Patrik
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg at icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg