Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Fri, 10 January 2020 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 5BFAC1200FF for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 06:36:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.218
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 6fonWKoyeJTg for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 06:36:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA31A1200EC for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 06:36:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=zDUamMWr2AJHh+9c9tT/BFLhzQhOYfuzT+ndbYiOboE=; b=BAMXJ8FHezvAbnehVcB2+TMR6 ocm3yj6TTq7j9wuP5KvqWmepDaeF/HAq5NHicC2+E2VDdKYTljh+lqgckCBqg3AVs8gkA3OceJNxe SqZ+fVKLNs7G5Wu9EuQx+ZcLzycDZvzAKlBo0XFKkKYhd7y3BGu1i7AjoREyRKcKQLztStQE6LXw3 PSue68EBVSupLe9h0Fz7QDHTTWKi34ikAc0wNOqu4Yum9WxhN8oyBVJah55eOjijFTs+53RQCgAjq NF6pUHDNZGgv6eUgQc4cTreckeJsyIiCnnfFKj7C5P8+6YBl5EQtWMJwli/WSzE9br6KegfANMyWJ ai771joBw==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:52385 helo=[192.168.1.10]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1ipvOX-002X44-0o; Fri, 10 Jan 2020 09:36:19 -0500
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_809AD86C-31B7-4F66-BA74-B275DB9AE662"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.40.2.2.4\))
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20200109210438.07f5deb0@elandnews.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 06:36:12 -0800
Cc: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-Id: <9F257662-5BD3-4D46-B4C2-3E9C67534F0C@strayalpha.com>
References: <4e888f0a-a1e8-df72-cbbc-9a2e2f0d0d05@iab.org> <7433C1A1-E071-417C-B7B8-CB4C12E7FEDC@strayalpha.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200109210438.07f5deb0@elandnews.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.40.2.2.4)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/V2vil41xQkWkYLNlhXXaFetmbW4>
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: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:36:29 -0000


> On Jan 9, 2020, at 11:17 PM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:
> 
>> 4) The policy should indicate a time frame
> 
> I didn't understand what you meant in (4).

Most of the examples imply current employer/collaborator. That association should be declared even into the recent past, for some number of years.

>> Some examples from other COI policies include:
>> 
>> - no current student/teacher relationship
>> - no PhD graduate / PhD primary advisor *forever*
>> - no current or recent proposal or paper co-author (whether granted or not) for 4 years
>> - not in any way associated with a current employer *and its subsidiaries*
>> - agree to not accept compensation (financial or not) for at least 1 year *after* participation
> 
> The last one is about "revolving door" rules.  I'll reuse an example which Ted posted.  The IAB is considering a recommendation for a RSE and decides to reject it.  An IAB member steps down and sets up a LLC.  There is another RFP and, based on the recommendation of RSOC, the IAB approves the contract for the LLC.  Would that be an appropriate course of action?

It depends on when the second RFP is issued (another time issue). If within 1 year (typically), then the member would be ineligible from leading, collaborating, or even advising an applicant to the new RFP.

The concept is “unfair advantage” because the member has inside information that *could be perceived* to provide unfair insight into responding to the new RFP.

Joe