QUOTE: Section 3. NOTICE AND COMMENT PROVISIONS (b) Prior to adoption of any policies that substantially affect the operation of the Internet or third parties, the Board will: (i) provide public notice on the Web Site explaining what policies are being considered for adoption and why; (ii) provide a reasonable opportunity for parties to comment on the adoption of the proposed policies, to see the comments of others, and to reply to those comments; and (iii) after a reasonable comment period, take action on the proposed policies, establishing an effective date, and publishing the reasons for the action taken. UNQUOTE Which appears to mean: (i)We will tell you what we intend to do (ii) We will seek your comments (iii) after a reasonable comment period, we will do as we choose - regardless of our obligation to act in public trust function, your comments and our pre-existing obligations. Shouldn't iii) have something built in about requiring a majority of Registrars to expressly consent or not more than 5 registrars to object or similar. IANA still appear to be ignoring the fact that their authority to act is only by consensus and constrained by public trust functions. Where pre-existing rules have operated they appear to have obtained the status of contractual terms and those terms could only be changed by consent. Nick Lockett E-Mail: <mailto:NLOCKETT at sidley.com> Private E-mail: <mailto:netlaw at netlaw.co.uk> This message is the personal opinion of Nick Lockett -no liability is accepted -------- Logged at Fri Oct 2 14:59:37 MET DST 1998 ---------