[RZERC] FOR REVIEW: DRAFT Minutes 28 February teleconference

[Peter Koch]

Dear RZERC,

I could not articipate in the call, so I won't judge the correctness of the minutes.

> ???reactionary committee??? sounds like we???re in Stalinist-era Russia. How about saying ???passive committee??? instead? ie RZERC is going wait for someone to ask us to do something rather than go around looking for things to keep ourselves busy.

However, my Cupertino provided Dictionary says "adjective; opposing political or
social progress or reform".  While there might be a small grain of intent
in this, "reactive" might be a better term, if such term is needed at all.
>From an outside reader's perspective, I wonder why the committee would
actually formally "agree" to this, since it's already stated in the charter.
What isn't spelled out in the charter, and what the committee still needs to 
figure out is the meaning of "architectural changes" and me thinks this
still belongs on our todo list.  And for those changes that we do not consider
"architectural" (without prejudice, this could be the IANA's "technical checks")
the community would probably appreciate an agreed upon point of reference.

> Could you *please* distribute documents, minutes, etc in a neutral format, ie PDF. This is particularly important for the stuff that goes on the RZERC web site. I have very strong religious objections to Microsoft products and formats.

Without the religious impetus, I'm pretty certain that most everyone on this
list would or has already violated some corporate security policy by
opening the document ...
While MS's combat editing mode might be appealing, fixed text and comments
in email should be fine.

-Peter