Milton, If the course of actions you have outlined will be followed then I have no problem to follow the stepwise course of actions. By the way I read carefully and listen carefully thus no need to be reminded by any one as I am not so ding Tks Kavouss 2015-02-09 4:55 GMT+01:00 Russ Mundy <mundy@tislabs.com>:
On Feb 9, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote:
The numbers proposal sees these changes as a requirement of the transition and the protocols parameters proposal does not. If these aspects of the proposals are perceived as incompatible would the numbers and protocol parameters communities be willing to modify their proposals to reconcile them?
Alissa,
Thanks for pulling the discussion together. I wouldn't object to the current wording of the question but think that the "question" paragraph could be a bit clearer so let me suggest the following para replace above:
The ICG perceives that the protocol parameters and numbers proposals are incompatible on this point, i.e., the numbers proposal sees these changes as a requirement of the transition and the protocols parameters proposal does not. Would the numbers and protocol parameters communities be willing to modify their proposals to reconcile them or describe how the current proposals are compatible?
Russ
_______________________________________________ Internal-cg mailing list Internal-cg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg