Re: Last Call: 'Process for the IAB and IESG selection of IAOC members' to BCP

[Geoff Huston <gih at apnic.net>]

> It seems to me that what would be required to do so would be three
> statements:
>
>    ISOC's appointees do not represent ISOC, in the same way that IAB
>    and IESG appointees do not represent the IAB or IESG. They serve
>    the entire community.
>
>    Nomcom appointees do not represent a subclass of all IETF
>    participants, in the same way that IAB and IESG appointees do not
>    represent the IAB or IESG. They serve the entire community.
>
>    Since the IAOC manages the relationship between ISOC and the IETF,
>    direct understanding of both IETF and ISOC is of value in all
>    appointees.
>
> Is there any reason the document shouldn't say that?

As one of the editors of this document I would note the following in 
response to your suggestions, by way of explanation as to why these 
statements are not in this draft:

- This document is a document that is limited to the definition of a 
procedure for the IAB and IESG to follow. It deliberately does not extend 
further than that quite limited brief, and did not intend to describe the 
accountabilities of the individuals that are selected through the 
application of this process.

- More generally, this document does not define the role or 
accountabilities of the IAOC. This more general objective is part of the 
intention of RFC 4071. Accountabilities of IAOC members are described in 
section 3.3 of that document, and it is repeated again in section 4 of that 
document. In reading that and comparing it to the three statements above 
its my personal view that this covers the first two of the statements 
proposed above.

- It is my view that the third statement above is beyond the scope of this 
draft. From my understanding of the structure we (IETF and ISOC) are in, I 
would not share your view that the "IAOC manages the relationship between 
ISOC and the IETF". To my mind the IAOC manages one operational aspect of 
this relationship, but as far as I can tell there's more to the 
relationship than just the IAOC.

However, I would also note that this is an IAB and IESG document, and if 
the IAB and IESG want these statements edited into the draft, then, of 
course, its their call.

regards,

   Geoff








`


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