Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy
Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> Thu, 09 January 2020 22:59 UTC
Return-Path: <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382C4120807; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:59:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_FONT_SIZE_LARGE=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MWqZqeuO5UcU; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:59:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 699FF120241; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:59:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2d.google.com with SMTP id g23so101441vsr.7; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 14:59:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=F/3ay+sYg9MxcVh2s8h2Y7whzO+xaAJxl4xQwrQydMI=; b=ce/H9IqkdvDowfhvtgPRN8a9l+PjICUTaynAHCJ2Cg5caky7ui2Hpifk2zQY3akGbO 7JazuD1J53Wkww4EVCZMAlW/f4KsWHCUFgChnjxCb2JSWEzxhMHCuHBRiSHnukIZCGIP xytc+d2azYRnhGq1wQLciEtpluPUucOo79svtM33bEfE7uYQU7LDcv7HRXtbLHSYRHx0 ezAsjdR8MheCSbWaKPKUPT9F8acyZOZjI6op+WbsoTG7m438QRX4asBCcbGRSd2/pLoV 4nqxQuWC5NnSFONFfvmwsE8Nc8WPAfB1WILkXyOKEAVveiAEYSO2P421/TlvceofiLeS rx3A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=F/3ay+sYg9MxcVh2s8h2Y7whzO+xaAJxl4xQwrQydMI=; b=IivECdbJuZIy+cz1p1yW2dJA5JTxShDPSily9t5M+5TB7f1WvBWdVFuin2EhYR+uJp sJ6YLWc3MeSuqJndAo7zOhYs88l00xAqVQtAX0RoeuKyWqTKLSMIvLgrybtHRBzoBO5T 5xBQCOgKP0QweeOHITfJTHGRm78gZmN1fhG/J+jZmOWJzWtzB91MqijFldKqzTb3b3ox U7tClMc1WVjvnZUQB7qKGFy1vAaLXXvSFsbFtuFuxtyMVrBJ6ufpapwGV3NqTQjBXG1W XHgU8j/Te7+Us1FGrWG2kGd6FMw1sNuuICyUA23WP/NUFYVOymGFI1mV1OKrNyGMrQ+m sQTw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVd0kA6NpgtibYo7dmnVkZPlyGTwKfdQ9gj6XkGEDbjVnyqLTjV XAUQRAewW9pYafQ2X5shqnJt34qwSodDMPSU7CBRTA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw2wjOtcBzHIifJpZ8/JKEmZeeHKMML6R7INONcr2uIqEUS5YOjH+MHjPSjwSDI1AikZwbXrg+h6XnPEvh9hTU=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:20c:: with SMTP id z12mr69978vsp.32.1578610759083; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 14:59:19 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4e888f0a-a1e8-df72-cbbc-9a2e2f0d0d05@iab.org> <CAL02cgTOAEH43zs-CjCSs64gTre65eXrSfNOBXCWDFYyfMkLvg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL02cgTOAEH43zs-CjCSs64gTre65eXrSfNOBXCWDFYyfMkLvg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 14:59:08 -0800
Message-ID: <CAOW+2duibA8AJ8jkVeeJc9Eb917neT1jqc_EEc8EmaQ1idpbXg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Cc: IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>, IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000088abbd059bbcf588"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/C84ktEGRHdKGquPy9FVh1STXGI4>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 22:59:24 -0000
Agree with Richard here. Much of the IAB work is technical in nature. The IAB should therefore not need a conflict-of-interest policy as heavy weight as that required to assume a senior role within government, a legislature or a governmental advisory committee. Having served on a governmental advisory committee covered by FACA, it would appear to me that the proposed IAB COI policy is potentially more stringent. As an example, under FACA I was not required to provide a complete financial disclosure. The guidance was that a disclosure need only be made in the event of a potential conflict, should one arise. On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 8:58 AM Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx> wrote: > I would propose the IAB not adopt this policy, or at least scope it way > down. > > Much of the IAB's work is focused on technical issues, at a high enough > strategic level that the impacts to specific people or companies are highly > attenuated. In those discussions, the IAB's work benefits from having > diverse opinions, including the opinions of those who have skin in the > game. Trying to introduce some notion of CoI in this context would be > harmful -- because there's no hard conflict, it will inevitably be vague, > and thus primarily a tool for IAB members to try to silence one another or > a cause for IAB members to self-censor. > > Where the IAB is directly involved in finance or personnel decisions, > there of course should be guards against self dealing. That's where any > CoI policy for the IAB should stop. > > --Richard > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 6:16 PM IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org> wrote: > >> Dear Colleagues, >> >> The IAB is considering adoption of the conflict of interest policy >> below. If you have comments on this draft policy, please send them to >> iab@iab.org. >> >> best regards, >> Ted Hardie >> for the IAB >> >> >> INTERNET ARCHITECTURE BOARD CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY >> >> This policy covers the nomcom-selected Internet Architecture Board (IAB) >> members and ex-officio members (collectively, “Covered Individuals”). This >> policy has no impact on any other participants in IAB activities, for >> instance liaisons to and from the IAB or IAB program members. >> >> In carrying out their IAB role, Covered Individuals must act in the best >> interest of the Internet community. Occasionally this duty may be—or may >> appear to be—incompatible or in conflict with a Covered Individual’s >> personal interests (including interests of their family members), or the >> interests of an organization of which the Covered Individual is an >> employee, director, owner, or otherwise has business or financial interest. >> If a Covered Individual has a conflict of interest for whatever reason, >> that individual must avoid participating in the work of the IAB that >> touches on the related matter. >> >> The IAB does not directly deal with matters relating to contracts or >> finance. The IAB does, however, have a role in personnel decisions, and its >> decisions and outputs have a potential to indirectly affect contracts >> within the IETF system. IAB's technical decisions and outputs have also a >> potential to impact both work elsewhere in the IETF and businesses that >> employ or develop Internet technology. >> >> Covered Individuals shall not use the IAB’s resources or decisions as a >> means for personal or third-party gain. >> Disclosure of Actual or Potential Conflicts >> >> The IAB requires that all Covered Individuals disclose their main >> employment, sponsorship, consulting customer, or other sources of income >> when joining the IAB or whenever there are updates. >> >> In addition, when a topic is discussed at the IAB, the Covered >> Individuals are required to promptly disclose if that topic constitutes a >> perceived or potential conflict of interest. Once disclosed, Covered >> Individuals may recuse from participation in discussions or decisions at >> their discretion. >> >> The specific conflicts that may cause a perceived or potential conflict >> of interest are matters for individual and IAB judgment, but generally come >> in the following forms: >> >> - >> >> A personnel decision relates to the Covered Individual, a colleague >> that the Covered Individual's works closely with, or a family member. For >> the purposes of this policy, a "person working closely with" is someone >> working in the same team or project, or a direct manager or employee of the >> Covered Individual. And "family" means a spouse, domestic partner, child, >> sibling, parent, stepchild, stepparent, and mother-, father-, son-, >> daughter-, brother-, or sister-in-law, and any other person living in the >> same household, except tenants and household employees. >> - >> >> A decision or output from the IAB impacts a contract that the IETF >> enters into with a party, and that party relates to the Covered Individual, >> a colleague that the Covered Individual's works closely with, or a family >> member. >> - >> >> Activity on the IAB involves discussion and decisions regarding >> technical matters, mainly related to IETF activities. As an activity >> adjacent to a standardization process, it is often the case that Covered >> Individuals will have some (frequently non-financial) stake in the outcome >> of discussions or decisions that relate to technical matters. This policy >> does not require that Covered Individuals disclose such conflicts of >> interest as they relate to technical matters. However, Covered Individuals >> need to exercise their judgment and, in extraordinary cases be willing to >> disclose potential or perceived conflicts of interest even as they relate >> to technical matters. For example, if a Covered Individual's sponsor were >> in the process of entering a new market where there is an ongoing IAB >> discussion, then disclosure, or even recusal, might be appropriate, even if >> difficult. >> >> Disclosure Transparency >> >> A person's recusal to participate in the discussion of a topic is always >> noted in the public IAB minutes. In addition, the IAB will maintain a >> repository of all general disclosures of employment and other sponsorship. >> It is expected that much of this repository is public, but there can be >> situations where some disclosures (such as customers of consultants) are >> private. >> >> >> <https://github.com/jariarkko/alternate-iab-coi-policy/blob/master/coi-policy..md#status> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ > Architecture-discuss mailing list > Architecture-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss >
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Stewart Bryant
- [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy IAB Chair
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Vittorio Bertola
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy John C Klensin
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Eric Rescorla
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Stewart Bryant
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Alvaro Retana
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Warren Kumari
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Richard Barnes
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Ben Campbell
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Salz, Rich
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Salz, Rich
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Eric Rescorla
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Ben Campbell
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] Draft IAB conflict of interest… Ted Hardie
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Livingood, Jason
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Livingood, Jason
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Livingood, Jason
- Re: [arch-d] [EXTERNAL] Re: Draft IAB conflict of… Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Ben Campbell
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [arch-d] [EXTERNAL] Re: Draft IAB conflict of… Mary Barnes
- Re: [arch-d] [IAB] Draft IAB conflict of interest… S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Bernard Aboba
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Eric Rescorla
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Marc Blanchet
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Eliot Lear (elear)
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Joe Touch
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Pete Resnick
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Stewart Bryant
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Cullen Jennings
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Bernard Aboba
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Christian Huitema
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Brian E Carpenter
- [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Guntur Wiseno Putra
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Roni Even (A)
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy
- [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Guntur Wiseno Putra
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Robert Raszuk
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Randy Bush
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Salz, Rich
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Randy Bush
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Salz, Rich
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy John C Klensin
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Ted Hardie
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy Ted Hardie
- Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy S Moonesamy