At 03:08 PM 12/12/04 -0600, Pete Resnick wrote:
"This BCP will take effect upon adoption of the BCP by the IESG and the
concurrent <<insert thing that ISOC does which codifies in some
interesting way the adoption of the relationship by ISOC>>"
The usual way this is done, by ISOC, is by resolution; note that the
statement you proposed is in the form of a resolution. For examples, you
might review 96-11 and 96-12 in
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/general/trustees/resltn-complete.shtml. 96-11 has
been updated several times as the IETF has updated the relevant documents;
96-12 remains a fundamental guiding principle. The most recent was this
past summer: ISOC accepted its responsibilities wrt RFC 3777 in an email
ballot closing on 23 August.
RESOLVED: The ISOC BoT accepts and approves of the IETF process
entitled "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process:
Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees" and set forth in
RFC 3777, and accepts its responsibilities as described in that
document.
A few weeks later, the ISOC CEO named the new chair of the IETF nominating
committee, which is operating on that basis.
The way resolutions - or bylaw changes - come to pass is this: those who
want them (in the case of what you are proposing, the IETF) formulates the
resolution required, and engages in dialog with the ISOC Board, usually in
person at a board meeting. Having convinced the ISOC Board that this is
good for the IETF, good for ISOC, and good for all of ISOC's
constituencies, someone calls the question and we vote. See
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/general/trustees/bylaws.shtml.
ISOC is very interested in having the IETF restructuring effort succeed.
Its history suggests that if necessary it will scale back everything else
it does, and risk upsetting all of its other communities, and conduct major
fund-raising activities to meet the IETF's needs. I guess the discussion I
have heard concerning doomsday scenarios is baffling to me for this reason
if none other - there is no historical basis, and there is quite a bit of
real history including places where divergence of interests might have been
predicted. If a resolution reaffirming 96-12 is needed to calm IETF
insecurities, we will have a board meeting following the March IETF
meeting. The necessary dialog can take place and such a resolution can
happen if the IETF requests it and participates in it.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf