Subject: RE: [Enum] FYI: Papers on ENUM from TPRC 2001

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 09 Oct 2001 19:54:42 -0700

At 07:27 PM 10/9/2001, Rutkowski, Tony wrote:
>If this list is to be used for policy discussions,

pointing to a conference is quite common on IETF lists, Tony, as you 
know.  it is typically not an invitation to discuss something.

>the more significant paper (and notably omitted

highlighting a conference does not constitute touting a particular paper, 
contrary to your own posting.

>from the paper you cite) is the U.S. government's
>statement on ENUM policy.

The paper you cite says:

1.  services other than the IETF standardized ENUM will exist.

         That's hardly an interesting observation, Tony.

2.  no one should preclude the operation of those other services.

         Oddly, you are actually the only person who gives any public 
thought to those other services, never mind considering precluding their 
operation.

thank you for playing.

d/

----------
Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email-masked]>
Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464

_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum

---

From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 09:14:09 -0400 (EDT)

This statement is false.

-- 
		Please visit http://www.icannwatch.org
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   [email-masked]
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                 -->It's very hot and humid here.<--

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 07:32:22 -0700

indeed.  thank you for seeking greater care in my wording.

I should have included:  "in this group (and in some others)".

d/

ps.  and if you still disagree, feel free to document your 
position.   Hmmm.  Then again, please don't.  This sort of distraction from 
serious work is really the only purpose behind creating these sorts of 
controversies.

----------