It is my opinion that different PDPs need to be developed.

Thinking borrowing from the  "modular" approach of components
development of sufficiently quantifiable, stand-alone elements
foundation leading to complex systems of interrelated but essentially
mini-parts has stood the test of time. e.g. RFCs, open source software
parts, QNX, etc.

Bulky all-in-ones (be they technical standards, policies, laws,
regulations, etc) tend to result in not just contradictions therein,
but greater delays while harmonising everything .

Sincerely,

Alex

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 7:05 AM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Avri Doria [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>> In case it is not obvious i think separating this issue into 2 PDPS is a
>> really bad idea. Twice the work, twice the bureaucracy for a topic that is
>> essentially interrelated.
>

> You are also quite wrong that the two topics are interrelated in a way that makes separate PDPs on them duplicative. Answering the question "is Joint marketing and Cross ownership a policy change or an implementation detail?" does not answer ANY of the larger questions about private TLDs or whether vertical integration should be allowed and if so when and how. Even if there were one PDP, a bundled PDP would still have to answer _multiple_ questions. Each of those questions would require a separate working group, staff reports, difficult consensus, etc.
>
> Please note that I oppose a PDP on the second, short-term topic. I agree with the registrars that JM/CO is within the bounds of implementation. However, I am willing to propose the option of a separate PDP to accommodate the views of people (like you, Avri) who seem to support it. If I had my way, there would be only one PDP and it would be about VI and the long-term issues. This is, in other words, a compromise position that strays pretty far from what I believe should be done. I hope you will approach moving forward in the same spirit, Avri.
>
> I ask that the Council re-draft its GNSO council resolution along those lines, dividing the PDP proposal into two separate ones. I also ask that members of the NCUC who agree with me (or disagree with me) to please express their views.
>