ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: some pending IASA issues

2005-01-31 17:42:55
At 21:40 30/01/2005, Sam Hartman wrote:

>>>>> "JFC" == JFC (Jefsey) Morfin <jefsey(_at_)jefsey(_dot_)com> writes:

    JFC> 2. ISOC is an international organization, yet there is no
    JFC> indication about relations with ISOC local chapters. For
    JFC> organizing local IETF lists, assisting with IETF meetings,
    JFC> documenting specific local issues when requested, encouraging
    JFC> regional workshops, meetings, shows, publications. This
    JFC> should be noted in a short paragraph to acknowledge
    JFC> national/regional contributions and support and to leave open
    JFC> any further suggestion/development. Cost: 3lines to be added.

I agree it is appropriate for ISOC to discuss local chapters.

How do you see this impacting the IASA BCP?  Can you give an example
of what sort of change you are talking about?  Proposed text and an
indication of where it should go in the document would be best.

The target is not to modify the Internet process but to anchor it in its international context and to promote local contributions. There is a coming IETF meeting in Paris. The French ISOC chapter was not informed, we have no local contact. The discussion about the weather in Paris, would have been a good occasion to prepare more ties. There are specific needs that come from different situations and different cultures, as the current Pacific Debate on Governance shows it. These needs need to be documented and addressed.

Also, ISOC chapter could help some local PRs. IETF is a complex/heavy process to follow for individuals. Helping local teams to gather can only help research and proposition seeds to be introduced by independent/small companies and schools. This is certainly something ISOC Chapters can help.

I think we could add in part 7 after "Independence":


   International: ISOC shall work with its local Chapters, the IAD and IAOC to
      document how the IETF meetings and Internet standard process could take
      advantage from the ISOC international presence and market knowledge.

   JFC> 3. Regional representation. Most of the Internet
    JFC> organizations make sure their BoD is regionally
    JFC> distributed. This is not appropriate for a technical entity,
    JFC> however IAOC is an administrative body. I would suggest the
    JFC> Draft Section 4 to include a recommendation (not an
    JFC> obligation) that all the main parts of the world are
    JFC> represented at the IAOC. Cost: 2 lines to be added.

I agree that regional location is an important factor to consider when
selecting IAOC members.

Yes. But, it should only be mentionned as a recommendation. So there is no embarrassing obligation. As for suggested ISOC Chapters and multilingualism, the target is to open the way to further work on the issue.

jfc


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>