What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring)

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no>]

--On torsdag, september 02, 2004 12:01:35 +0200 Brian E Carpenter 
<brc at zurich.ibm.com> wrote:

> Christian also implies the converse question: would scenarios C & D
> reduce a hypothetical existing conflict of interest for the ISOC
> trusteees? Again, I don't see why. Firstly, I don't think there is
> an existing conflict of interest. Secondly, changing the IETF from
> an unincorporated association to an incorporated entity really
> cannot affect the ISOC trustees' fiduciary duty to ISOC, so any
> hypothetical conflict would not be changed.

one note, since this has been a repeated source of much confusion and 
miscommunication....

scenarios C and D envision incorporating the *support function* for the 
IETF. The IETF would remain an undefined entity under these scenarios.

I've had another suggestion that the IETF (the real technical process 
entity) should become a formally recognizable entity of some sort (possibly 
an unincorporated organization). But that's distinct from the idea of 
incorporating the support function, and is NOT described in the current 
document.

If people want that possibility described, please speak up - Carl has the 
pen ready....


                            Harald


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf