[Nanog-futures] Mail List Committee announcement

Philip Smith pfs at cisco.com
Wed May 14 07:29:47 UTC 2008

Hi Rob,

Robert E. Seastrom said the following on 14/5/08 14:04:
> Speaking as an observer who is both intimately familiar with the MLC
> (having served on it for over two years) and has been watching the
> current situation unfold since last autumn, I believe the more correct
> statement would be that the SC _has been derelict in its duty to allow
> this to continue as long as it has_.

Perhaps we have been. I've a strong belief in trying to work with all 
parties involved to try and resolve a situation, rather than provide a 
knee-jerk reaction which may have even worse long term implications. 
There has been quite considerable effort behind the scenes, but 
hindsight might indicate that there could have been better ways forwards.

> That's not to say though that some soul-searching isn't called for
> here, and I urge all members of the SC to engage in some heavy
> introspection and to do what they believe is honorable in light of
> this shortfall.

There has been a lot of discussion within the SC about what "the right 
thing to do" is/was/should have been. If the SC has made mistakes, I 
hope the lessons learned will help future SC members in the years to come.

Best wishes,


More information about the Nanog-futures mailing list