If this is true it make me wonder why does the IETF care about the
affiliation of WG chairs and ADs
Roni Even
From: ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of Mark
Atwood
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 7:17 PM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Public musing on the nature of IETF membership and employment
status
Much of what makes the IETF work is how it is very different from other
standards bodies (such as IEEE, ANSI, ISO, NIST, ITU, etc etc).
One key difference is that "groups" do not join the IETF.
Cisco, IBM, MCI, or Linden Lab are not a "members" of the IETF. No agency
of the US government, or of any other government, is a "member" of the IETF.
No university, non-profit, PIRG, PAC, or other "concerned citizens group",
is a "member" of the IETF.
Only individual people can be "members" of the IETF. And "membership" is
mostly defined as "who shows up on the mailing list" and "who shows up at
the meetings".
There have been many cases in the history of the IETF where well known
members who are in the middle of writing standards or of chairing various
important working groups, who have worked for well-known large companies,
will change employers, to other companies, to startups, or to personal
sabbaticals switch around between industry, academia, research, and
government, and this will not, does not, and should not, affect their
position inside the IETF at all.
It appears that sometimes people, inside and outside of the IETF, need to be
reminded of this.
If you want to write standards like the IEEE and ITU do it, you know where
you can find them.
But when you choose to participate in the IETF process, that is how it
works.
And if someone feels that anyone's change in employment status should affect
their standing in any part of the IETF process, that person has missed the
point, and needs to be pointedly reminded of their mistake.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf