Dear Protocol Council Members,
Please find below for your consideration and comments
the draft reply to ISO application.
Have a good week-end,
Best regards,
Vlad
****************************************************************************
*****************
Dear Mr. Brannon,
On behalf of the PSO Protocol Council I have to inform you on the following:
PSO Protocol Council discussed ISO application for SDO membership of the PSO
Please find below the positions of different PSO signatories and the
decision taken:
ETSI Representatives fully supported ISO application and stated that they do
not see anything that may prevent ISO from joining PSO-PC.
ETSI considers that ISO is fully qualified as an SDO in terms
of existing MOU and ETSI is in favour of inclusion of ISO as a member of
PSO.
ITU-T Representatives welcomed ISO application. ITU also believes that ISO
fulfills the necessary requirements.
IETF Representatives opposed to the ISO application.
IETF representatives referred to the Section 8 b (i) of MOU: "...In order
for an organization to become a party to this MOU, all then-existing MOU
signatories must agree that such an organization qualifies as an SDO..."
and further explained that as the PSO is evidently being wound up by the
Board of ICANN, it would be
unfair for ISO and PSO to admit ISO at this point in time.
W3C Representative supported the position of IETF.
As Protocol Council is a consensus-based body, and a consensus could not be
reached on this issue,
the conclusion made is that ISO can not be admitted into PSO at this point
in time.
Protocol Council Members noted that if ISO wishes it may apply to ICANN
under the terms of the MOU Section 8 (b) (ii), which says that:
"...Rejected applicants may appeal to the ICANN Board, which may override
such a rejection if the ICANN Board finds, by at least two-thirds vote, that
the organization meets the SDO criteria set forth above..."
Sincerely yours,
Vladimir Androuchko
PSO-PC Secretary August 2001-August 2002