RE: Let the games begin

[Peter Ford <peterf@microsoft.com>]

This actually illuminates an interesting procedural issue.  In many U.S.
governmental deliberations the agency issues a problem statement (and
perhaps a statement alongs the lines of "intention to rule") and
establishes a formal comment period.   A similar process was put into
action by the IESG in the IPng deliberations.

Would it be appropriate for the initial action of the iahc be to
establish the problem(s) that are to be addressed with  some summary of
potential directions and then open a finite lifetime public comment
period (internet-drafts?) after which the iahc would reconvene?  From
what I see on the various mailing lists getting a clear, simple
articulation of the "iahc problem statement" would be quite useful and
also help establish good scoping.

cheers, peter

>----------
>From: 	Paul Ferguson[SMTP:pferguso@cisco.com]
>Sent: 	Wednesday, November 20, 1996 7:19 AM
>To: 	shaw
>Cc: 	iahc-discuss
>Subject: 	Re: Let the games begin
>
>At 07:14 PM 11/19/96 +0200, shaw wrote:
>
>>
>>Well, in the last week or two, the IAHC has probably been contacted by
>>50 various 'coalitions/forums/special interest groups/intergovernmental
>>organizations/committees/individuals, etc.' from every possible sphere of 
>>activity you can imagine who also believe that 'they should be on the IAHC'.
>>In many cases, these requests appear to be justified but there is the need
>>to
>>find the balance between getting work done and some monstrous committee
>>which 
>>does nothing.
>>
>
>I'd be interested to see this list of coalitions/interested groups/etc.
>
>- paul
>
>