This is a good question.
We probably ought to say something.
This may be too strong (but I am not sure.)
At a minimum, I would expect an IAOC member with such a conflict of
interest to recuse themselves from any discussion of the situation.
But, as written, this has odd implications. For example, it seems to
prohibit an employee of such an organization from becoming IETF Chair or
IAB Chair. Given that we are expecting to contract for IT services, and
other information support services that might be provided by organizations
that actually participate in the IETF, this would seem unfortunate. It
could also prevent competent bidders from bidding sometimes.
Another thing that bothers me is that it heads us down the path of
requiring financial disclosures from our appointees, which I would really
rather avoid.
And what if one of the members is a consultant. He can probably quietly
recuse himself from discussions that relate to a confidential client. But
resigning, or blocking the client from bidding?
Yours,
Joel
At 09:07 AM 12/22/2004, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
One question arose when we were writing the original BCP that I haven't
seen discussed on the list...
Do we need a conflict of interest clause in the BCP? Something like:
The IAD and IAOC may not accept bids from nor establish contracts with
members of the IAOC, their family members, their employers or companies in
which they have a significant financial interest. If such a conflict of
interest arises, it should be quickly resolved through contract
termination or the resignation of the IAOC member involved.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf