At 10:02 AM 3/28/2013, John C Klensin wrote:
For me, it seems especially odd when
compared to the liaison position to the ICANN Board. Both are
very important to the IETF community. Both involve
organizations with which the IETF has a complicated and
multidimensional relationship. Both involve issues that are
very sensitive. Yet the IAB conducted an open call for
volunteers, followed by an open call for community comments, for
one position and simply announced the appointment for the other.
I think an explanation of the difference would be helpful for
everyone.
The ICANN position of IETF Liaison is defined in the ICANN charter and has a
specific fixed term, as such it gets handled via a call for volunteers and an
appointment by the IAB. AFAIK - there is no "IETF appoints a liaison to the
ITU-T board" position defined. I believe the actual "liaison" status is between
the IETF/ISOC and the ITU-T and the IETF ITU-T liaison acts more as a point of
contact than anything else. I find it telling that RFC6756 doesn't even
mention a role for a specified person designated as liaison.
I would assume this accounts for the difference. (Formal role vs informal/ad
hoc role).
Mike