Yes. I have a feeling that even with the BCP approved by the IESG
and by an ISOC Board motion, we would still need a piece of paper with
ink signatures - it might only say that the IETF and ISOC agree to the
terms of the BCP - it might also contain termination clauses about
money and IPR, if the termination clauses aren't in the BCP. In any
case it would be very short.
my lawyer-paranoia may get the better of me, but.... if the IETF remains a
legal "null", I have to wonder what my signature on a piece of paper
means,
or could be made to mean..... I've passed this to Jorge (lawyer) for an
opinion.
This is not different from previous agreements between ISOC and IETF such as
for example the approval of the IETF process. The usual procedure is:
1. The IETF prepares and publishes an RFC detailing the procedure. This is the
formal IETF "ink".
2. The £50 board of trustees passes a resolution approving the RFC. This is the
ISOC "ink".
Simple, and uses the tools of each organization.
-- Christian Huitema.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf