<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Patrik:<br>
<br>
I don't think there's a real issue with keeping the OC
descriptions/historical function as long as we provide the needed
examples of cooperation and consultation across different
scenarios. The mere statement that the concept of cooperation
exists is not sufficient to make the needed point that collaboration
and cooperation are context specific/as needed or provide the kind
of assurance that will address the misplaced desire to develop or
impose a specific mechanism for collaboration and cooperation.<br>
<br>
Joe<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/3/2015 2:57 AM, Patrik Fltstrm
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:50C47772-2958-4FBB-A5BC-2B88B9B11F7C@frobbit.se"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 3 Oct 2015, at 1:42, Alissa Cooper wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The fact that the bodies that establish registry policies can also choose which operator will run the registry is interesting, but its a bit of a subtle point and I think it may be complicated to explain without adding a lot of additional clarifying value.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Hmm...let me just ensure my point is made clear here.
As each registry is decided upon by the OC defining it, and not the OCs as a collective, collaboration is explicitly needed. They must explicitly reach out to the other OCs and collaborate with them.
That was my point.
Patrik
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Internal-cg mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org">Internal-cg@mm.ianacg.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org">http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>