On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:59:39PM +0000, James Gannon wrote:
Which is why during extensive discussions over months of CWG work we agreed on what we have in the proposal. I really don’t think any of us have time to be revisiting things like this again.
Hear, hear. I think it is in general a bad idea to try to revisit principles or anything like that now: several of these details are the result of a great deal of previous thinking and working over previously. Moreover, we're not anyway in a position to change the consensus document: it's already been out for comment, approved, and shipped by the ICG and ICANN. If something for implementation is actually at odds with the report, we should raise concerns. If, however, something now seems like an issue in the report that might need fixing, well, we'll need to cope with that change later unless we want to stop the transition happening. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@anvilwalrusden.com