Ron Ipsen wrote:

> At 21:47 23/07/98 +1000, Tony Barry wrote in reply to Sandra Davey:
>
> >>I would be pleased to see such a hot-topic, sub-committee'd off to a
> >>smaller, less argumentative list, who could then throw back to this list,
> >>some reasonable suggestions.
> >
> >Agree completely.
>
> Yes this seems like a good idea (.tm) - Perhaps some sort of chair/moderator
> could be responsible for bringing back the findings.
>
> Could we perhaps define the parameters? would it fit into NOIE's
> "identifying the problems" question?

I agree with this recommendation, though at the risk of getting a
task I can't complete right now, I think someone needs to go back
through the last umpteen posts and summarise the lists of questions
and issues that people have raised.

George got part of the way with this post;

>I suggest people stop bashing around on their small concerns in the specific
>2LD, and instead concentrate on what governance REALLY means.
>
>        * how do we form a representative body
>        * what processes make it viable (appointment, operation, appeal)
>        * what legal issues need to be confronted
>        * funding
>        * transition
>
>Kates list is the basis of discussing these kinds of topics. Can we get
>back to it?

I also threw in a few infrastructure questions, but they fall under the
broad heading above of "operation". [and until there are specific answers
to this then Larry's offer of rehosting org.au must go unheeded - his
infrastructure/ability cannot be assessed without a requirements list,
and a stmt of fulfilment]

Does anyone want to have a stab at taking a topic from George's list and
running with it? More than one taker is fine, we can review it and
compile the results into a single list/resolution.

A further question must be how/what to compile as a list of guiding
principles - surely we must start with those of;

- independence
- competition
- consumer protection
- reasonableness
- cooperation

but I suspect much of this is reflected in the stmts on the extg policies
of aunic (though it must be asked how relevant is aunic now that apnic is
here?) melb it etc, so does anyone want to have a stab at reviewing the
extg policy framework in the light of the range of views represented here?

Cheers


Narelle
oh and if anyone shits on the university folk again on their ability
to a) provide a service and b) set appropriate stds I will go ballistic -
I see almost *exclusively* ex-/current AARNet folks making concrete efforts
here!

pps thanks to Lan Systems, Cisco, 3Com and Xylan for the great party
last night - food, drink and entertainment was *excellent* yawn

--
Narelle Clark                                   ph: +612 9342 6503
Technical Specialist                           fax: +612 9342 7766
Technology & Planning
Optus Communications                         narellec§optus.com.au
---------------------#include-std.disclaimer----------------------