- From: <azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es>
- Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 08:25:07 +0200
- To: pso-pc@w3.org
Dear PSO PC colleagues, Following Brian´s suggestion to return back to the agreed action and prepare independent statements on each organization and try to find common points afterwards, please find below the ETSI proposed text to be input to the ICANN ERC: "The PSO PC has reviewed the sections on the proposed Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) in the ICANN Evolution and Reform Committee (ERC) Second Interim Implementation Report at: http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/second-implementation-report-02s ep02.htm The PSO PC thanks the ERC for its extensive work and the clear and comprehensive report. It generally supports the proposals of the ERC with respect to TAC, with the exceptions noted below. "The PSO has been informed that the IAB undertakes the role of nominating external liaisons for the IETF, and interpreting this in the context of the proposed arrangements relating to the membership of the TAC, it is noted that the IAB would logically have the role of nominating 4 positions to the TAC." "As a result of the previous information, the PSO can not understand the reason why it is proposed that the IAB should nominate double number of positions to TAC than the other three peer organizations. The PSO supports equal treatment to all the identified standards organizations (ETSI, IETF, ITU-T and W3C) and the nomination of 2 candidates per organizations seems to be an appropriate figure. "The PSO considers that TAC members are representatives of their respective organizations and their role is to act as doorways into the respective pools of expertise, to help ICANN. TAC should not be seen as a group of individual experts meeting amongst each other to make technical decisions. "In that light, it is not clear why the membership of TAC should be expanded to include members nominated by the NomCom. Unless some particular reason is given, the PSO PC proposes that the membership of TAC consist of two representatives from each of the member organizations, which at this time are ETSI, IETF, ITU, and W3C." So far the ETSI proposal. Of course, every appearance of the term "PSO" will change into "ETSI" if not commonly agreed. Kind regards, Azucena ********************************************************* Azucena Hernandez Telefonica de España Desarrollo de Red Tel: +34 91 5846842 Fax: +34 91 5846843 GSM: +34 609425506 E-Mail: azucena.hernandezperez@telefonica.es *********************************************************** ___________________________________________________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario y puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial. Si no es vd. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización está prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee and may contain information that is CONFIDENTIAL and protected by professional privilege. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copy or disclosure of this communication is strictly prohibited by law. If this message has been received in error, please immediately notify us via e-mail and delete it. ___________________________________________________________________________
Received on Thursday, 5 September 2002 02:28:44 UTC