In that case, I'll modify my statement to "I'd be happier if #9 was less obtuse (that is, happier if it's intent was more direct or clear).

At 10:33 -0800 11/10/08, Barbara Roseman wrote:

Ed, I believe 9 addresses some of the proposed workflows published with the NOI. It was not in either the VeriSign or ICANN proposals, but was, I believe, in some of the other diagrams.

-Barb


On 11/10/08 10:17 AM, "Edward Lewis" <Ed.Lewis@neustar.biz> wrote:

At 8:57 +0000 11/10/08, Jim Reid wrote:

>can I ask for your support on this latest version?

I'd be okay with this, in general, except for two things.

#1 - I'd be happier without 9 - I mean, just delete it.  (Why is it
there?  Did someone believe there was a technical justification to
add an organization?)

#2 - I'd be happier if the list wasn't just a set of requirements but
included some "here's a way to do it"s.  But then, this point is not
critical.

>9. There is no technical justification to create a new organisation to
>oversee the process of signing of the root.

--
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Never confuse activity with progress.  Activity pays more.

-- 

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis                                                +1-571-434-5468
NeuStar

Never confuse activity with progress.  Activity pays more.