Certainly consistent with where I was trying to head.
john
--On Tuesday, 11 January, 2005 10:34 +0100 Harald Tveit
Alvestrand <harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no> wrote:
I think I should apologize for including a modification to the
IAOC role in the "removability" clause in a discussion of
finances. It is not relevant to that topic.
But the discussion pointed out to me that there is some
strangeness here - in that the IAOC is described as having a
role in the process for removing IASA from ISOC, while the
ISOC president is on the IAOC.
Current text:
Removability: While there is no current plan to transfer
the legal
and financial home of the IASA to another corporation,
the IASA
shall be structured to enable a clean transition in the
event that
the IETF community decides that such a transition is
required and
documents its consensus in a formal document (currently
called a
BCP). In such a case, the IAOC shall give ISOC a
minimum of six
months notice before the transition formally occurs.
During that
period, the IAOC and ISOC shall work together to create
a smooth
transition that does not result in any significant
service outages
or missed IETF meetings. All contracts executed by ISOC
on behalf
of IASA shall either include a clause allowing
termination by ISOC
with six months notice, or shall be transferable to
another
corporation in the event that the IASA transitions away
from ISOC.
Any accrued funds, any IETF-specific intellectual
property rights,
and any IETF-specific data and tools shall also
transition to the
new entity.
I think a more correct phrasing is to make this the IETF's
responsibility, not the IAOC's. If the IETF decides to use
some part of the IAOC in some fashion in the changeover phase,
that's their privillege to decide at the time - one would
think that this would be part of the BCP text.
New phrasing:
Removability: While there is no current plan to transfer
the legal
and financial home of the IASA to another corporation,
the IASA
shall be structured to enable a clean transition in the
event that
the IETF community decides that such a transition is
required and
documents its consensus in a formal document (currently
called a
BCP). In such a case, the IETF shall give ISOC a
minimum of six
months notice before the transition formally occurs.
During that
period, the IETF and ISOC shall work together to create
a smooth
transition that does not result in any significant
service outages
or missed IETF meetings. All contracts executed by ISOC
on behalf
of IASA shall either include a clause allowing
termination by ISOC
with six months notice, or shall be transferable to
another
corporation in the event that the IASA transitions away
from ISOC.
Any balance in the IASA accounts, any IETF-specific
intellectual
property rights, and any IETF-specific data and tools
shall also
transition to the new entity. Other terms will be
negotiated
between the IETF and ISOC.
None of this text has been flagged as controversial in the
last month of discussion, so I don't think it should be
controversial now.
And - again - I don't think we'll ever have to use it, but
it's OK to have it written.
OK?
Harald
_______________________________________________
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