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

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 16-Jan-20 14:15, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> 
> 
> Toerless,
> 
> Considering that not that many of us are really good in predicting the future you post a pretty tough question to answer ;)
> 
> Cheers,
> R.
> 
>     "Can the work of the IAB that you contribute to impact future
>     financial results of your employer / sponsor ?"

I think that's easy. Read the arguments that you, as a candidate, made to your employer to justify you spending time and travel budget on IAB membership. If those arguments do not explain how IAB membership will positively affect your employer, answer "No". But in that case, I rather doubt that your employer would have allowed you to accept the nomination. Mine certainly wouldn't have.

In other words, the only credible answer to this question is "Yes".
 
>     If one would answer YES, does that constitute a COI ?

Poetntially, yes. Even a self-employed engineer has this potential COI. It's something I lived with as a WG chair, IAB member, IESG member, ISOC Board member, and for that matter in completely other non-profit roles at various times.
 
>     If not, then what would be a good reference example for the most minor COI
>     that one should be concerned about ?

IMHO: arguing in a WG for a bit position when your company's running code or hardware already assumes that bit position. Or arguing for a strange new protocol feature that your company's business model relies on. That's probably only happened a few hundred times in the IETF's history. There's nothing special about IAB (or even IESG) membership from this point of view. It's potentially all of us. As long as it's argued in public, we can resolve it.

That's why I don't get the point of an IAB COI policy. We don't have an IETF COI policy, but I believe that's because the IETF process rules were themselves designed around avoiding the standards process being damaged by COI. As long as the standards process is fully open, and HR and budget COI is covered by IETF LLC rules, why bother?

Regards
    Brian

> 
>     Thanks
>         Toerless
> 
>     >
>     >      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
>     > [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
> 
> 
>     -- 
>     ---
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>