Re: [ICANN-EU] (Almost) Required Reading.

[Thomas Roessler <roessler@does-not-exist.org>]

On 2000-10-19 07:33:24 +0200, Jefsey Morfin wrote:

> Sure. One of the current trend is to say "only 2 real @large have
> been elected and the result is 'poor'. 

Where did you read that?  I'd be really interested in the source.

> So why not to consider that the NC, BC etc... selected people can
> replace the @large". 

One could certainly understand the post-election mailing like that.

> In the discussed scheme not only the 4 remaining ALDs would not
> be elected, but the 5 current ones would not be renewed.

This would be possible, indeed.

> In the case of IEFT @large people will not interfere with
> technicalities but they will serve as a permanent test bed of the
> concepts and a way to better asses priorities. 

This actually happens in a quite natural way:  It's a long way for
something to become an internet standard.  This requries, among
other things, two different, interoperable implementation.  That is,
if something which is intended to become a standard at some point
isn't accepted by the market, it is extremely unlikely that anyone
will make the effort to get this to be an internet standard.

(OK, I may be a bit biased on this because I have been participating
in an IETF working group [OpenPGP] for some time, and have even been
drafting some RFCs-to-be.)

-- 
Thomas Roessler                         <roessler@does-not-exist.org>