Olaf,
On Mar 30, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
Dear Colleagues,
I have just chartered a very short draft that intends to update BCP101. It
can be found at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kolkman-iasa-ex-officio-membership
The draft is very short and contains only a few sentences of substance:
The IETF chair, the IAB chair, and the ISOC President/CEO may
delegate their responsibilities to other persons. The delegations by
the IETF chair and the IAB chair need to be confirmed by the IESG and
IAB respectively. The terms of delegation is for a longer term for
instance aligned with the IESG and IAB appointment cycles (roughly
anual).
To clarify, from our 1:1 discussions, the intent is to allow the IETF chair to
delegate their position on the IAB, IAOC, and IETF Trust, allow the IAB chair
to delicate their position on the IAOC, IETF Trust, and IESG, and the ISOC
President to delegate their position on the IAOC, IETF-Trust, and IAB. From
reading the discussion, it not clear to me that everyone understands this.
The above text does not say "delegate their ex-officio memberships", it says
"delegate their responsibility". That is it ways they can delegate all of
their responsibility. I don't think this was your intent, but if it was it
goes too far. Please clarify.
John Klensin made me aware he also had a similar idea earlier:
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-klensin-iaoc-member-00.txt
The main difference is between his and this draft is that John's I-D makes
the person the chair delegates to a non-voting liaison. I have a small
preference for the IAB and the IESG keeping the control point, and I
implicitly assume that for IASA matters the persons delegated to will
escalate to the chairs and ask for specific guidance when appropriate. I
realize that for the Trust anybody serves on personal title. For the trust
alignment with the IAOC membership is just a practical considerations.
With my IAOC hat on, I am concerned about the delegation of these roles to the
IAOC. I think the community has been well served by the IAOC having the IETF
chair, IAB chair, and ISOC President as full voting members of the IAOC. It
has kept the IAOC from "going off the rails". I am concerned that this
proposal will weaken the effective governance model that has worked well.
I haven't checked yet, but would these proposed changes require changes to any
of the IETF Trust documents? More may have to change than BCP 101. Did you
check?
I don't have any issue with the delegation of the ex-officio responsibilities
to/from the IAB and IESG.
The shared requirement is unloading the I* chairs and the ISOC president and
empowering the people that serve in that role to organize themselves. (I
should have paid more attention to this much earlier.)
I plan to seek a sponsoring AD for getting this I-D published as a BCP
shortly.
Doesn't a BCP require a 4 week last call? I don't think this can or should be
done quickly. It's a non-trivial change.
Bob
Assuming this is an appropriate list for further discussion,
yours,
--Olaf
________________________________________________________
Olaf M. Kolkman NLnet Labs
Science Park 140,
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ 1098 XG Amsterdam
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf