To:
"James Seng/Personal" <James@Seng.cc>
cc:
"Sheer El-Showk" <sheer@saraf.com>, "Brian W. Spolarich" <briansp@walid.com>, "Patrick" <patrick@gandi.net>, "Kent Crispin" <kent@songbird.com>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se, brunner@nic-naa.net
From:
Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Date:
Wed, 07 Feb 2001 10:26:15 -0500
In-Reply-To:
Your message of "Wed, 07 Feb 2001 22:38:27 +0800." <02e801c09113$a58c37d0$6800a8c0@jamessonyvaio>
Sender:
owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject:
Re: draft-hollenbeck-grrp-reqs-06 [Was Re: Interim Meeting]
> Maybe I wasn't clear (*sigh* I got misunderstood a lot here), but I > never objected to Scott's GRRP Requirements I-D as a starting group. So > I make it in plain English: It is a good start. Progress. Late, after significant smoke and little light, but an improvement. > I am suggesting that > > a. Quite a lot of other domain names registries have not read it. So? The readership levels for the alternatives is even less compelling. > b. It is probably still incomplete and need more work. A given, which could have been verified by writing Scott, or any AD who didn't last-call it on first reading. Eric