I fear that I need to side with Dave on this (!). For issues at
the technology-policy boundary, ISOC is seen in the outside
community as the representative and "voice" of the IETF. That
is generally a good thing and it is an impression many of us
have worked for years to create. However, its side-effect is
that, if ISOC ventures into a management/policy role with one
particular consortium, the same folks we have been trying to
persuade that ISOC should be seen as the lead policy body in the
Internet technical community --in large measure because it does
represent the IETF-- are likely to infer (and reasonably so)
IETF endorsement of that consortium and its efforts.
That ultimately has little or nothing to do with whether the
IETF has active work in the area or how that work is organized.
It is the presumption that the IETF is taking/endorsing a set of
positions via ISOC.
Like Dave, I don't see looking for IETF community consensus on
the details is either necessary or desirable. At the same time,
I think the IETF should be aware of the decisions being made and
the actions being taken early enough that interested community
members can make comments that are considered in the ISOC mix
and decision process. If this has been discussed in depth with
the IAB and the IAB chose to not engage the community in advance
of the press releases, then, IMO, the IAB has fallen down on its
job. Independent of the IAB, while IETF-appointed ISOC BoT
members represent themselves and not the IETF, I believe that
you (collectively) have at least a moral obligation to notice
issues on which the IETF community should be informed and to
make sure that happens... an obligation that goes well beyond
"well, you could have come to the meetings or read the minutes".
Certainly I know that the IETF has, as a body, tended to pay
fairly little attention to ISOC actions and activities. But
that may be a reason for more, rather than less, outreach.
I am not suggesting trying to undo this decision, but believe
that, as ISOC adds sufficient technically-qualified staff to
engage in activities like this on its own, we need to work,
collectively, on better ways to facilitate communication in a
timely basis in the future. In particular, we need to work
fairly hard to avoid a situation in which the IETF and ISOC end
up with different positions on an issue with external visibility
and consequences. To do so would damage the credibility of all
Ietf mailing list