ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Proposed IETF Trust Conflict of Interest Policy for Community Review

2016-03-29 18:33:24
the process in the IAOC needs to be developed & vetted by the community - the 
IAOC needs this 
anyway - we have running code (when an IAOC member went AWOL) that the current 
mechanism
is not enough

but having a single place that a process needs to be defined & vetted (the 
IAOC) is
better than having two (IAOC & Trust)

Scott

On Mar 29, 2016, at 7:23 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> 
wrote:

No disagreement, but I don't know that it answers the question of whom it 
should be reported to. The IAOC has no way to replace a member of the trust 
except through its own membership. It could kick out a member of the IAOC, 
who would have to be replaced, but replacing them is the responsibility of 
whoever sent them in the first place, which might be the province of the IAB, 
the IESG, ISOC, or the nomcom.

On Mar 29, 2016, at 4:17 PM, Scott O. Bradner <sob(_at_)sobco(_dot_)com> 
wrote:

see previous note - if someone were to be doing the kicking off it should be 
the IAOC
which would automatically kick the person off the Trust and leave a vacancy 
that could
be filled

if the trust were to kick someone off it would be down a trustee with no 
mechanism for the
vacancy to be filled

Scott

On Mar 29, 2016, at 7:07 PM, Fred Baker (fred) <fred(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> 
wrote:

I'm not sure I understand it either, but at the same time I'm not sure whom 
they SHOULD report it to. It does seem like it should be reported. Issue a 
press release? Send an email to ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org? IETF+IAB? Whom?

Note, BTW, that as currently structured, a report to the IAOC is a somewhat 
vacuous action. The members of the IAOC and the members of the Trust are 
the same set of people.

On Mar 29, 2016, at 3:51 PM, Bob Hinden 
<bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:

Hi,

Overall I think this is a good idea and this seems to me to be a 
reasonable policy, with one exception.

At the end it says:

"If the Trustees decide by unanimous vote of the Trustees then in office 
(other than the Trustee in question) that the Trustee had in fact 
purposefully failed to disclose a significant possible conflict of 
interest, the Trustees shall bar the Trustee from participating (in person 
or remotely) in any ongoing matters related to the potential conflict and 
review past decisions that may have been unduly influenced by the Trustee 
in conflict. The Trustees shall report any such bar and the results of any 
such review to the IAOC for potential action. The Trustees may also decide 
by unanimous vote of the Trustees then in office (other than the Trustee 
in question) that a conflict of interest reported by a Trustee is of such 
a nature as to require the Trustee to refrain from all Trust activities.  
The Trustees shall report any such determination to the IAOC for potential 
action.”

The IETF Trust is not part of the IAOC, nor is the IAOC responsible for 
the IETF trust.  That is, the IAOC is not above the IETF Trust.  Given 
this, I don’t understand the text I cited above.

Please explain.

Thanks,
Bob



On Mar 29, 2016, at 10:52 AM, The IETF Trust 
<ietf-trust(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> wrote:

The IETF Trust would like community input on a proposed Conflict of
Interest Policy.

The trustees of a legal trust entity, such as the IETF Trust, should
be subject to a conflict of interest policy.  Accordingly, the
Trustees are considering this policy for adoption.

The policy discusses the following:
1.  Application of Policy
2.  Conflict of Interest
3.  Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
4.  Procedures for Review of Potential Conflicts
5.  Violations of Conflict of Interest Policy

The proposed Conflicts of Interest Policy is located here:
http://trustee.ietf.org/documents/IETF-Trust-Conflict-Policy-18March2016.htm

The Trustees will consider all comments received by 13 April 2016.

Ray Pelletier
Trustee
IETF Administrative Director