IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iasa20] I-D Action: draft-hall-iasa20-workshops-report-00.txt

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Tue, 21 March 2017 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA0781294B7 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 QNlKT7QfbLy1 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x233.google.com (mail-wm0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (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 B1023129A71 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x233.google.com with SMTP id n11so15408152wma.1 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=zG1Y3X3nMSZJfNLkIRKhh8bRzfpQI1Dhl/Ss4q1b31g=; b=o9MDrv7L52rscrvx0G/dm1s8+m942sUKsgdKLYguhpegUWM4Gr2jH5S0hdu/bg+UCS YhgFy8+EQNoBiak2b3daw/KIpRxE/GGnuXVj2U2fzTj1MoltRvRsUWn6Ziia20OWZqBi OoCQRevZmIQGuJfzqYIsuYEaP8/ElPO9bpW5vX+Wn8SoeAvPn7QbMm4MlobEZEFJfAyY Lmym0QYF9sI9mYzZ+xKLvjWcw2wi31v2p2csWGnTrk63wxdDCAl1CSsSECc4GxwutfOv r1NkGbnvC79ZlVGBi/+O5lOZnkXpCdZUTMhDEl0yiBMWwpUJsgF5N4hHs0RWLh6r8YWt AC9Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=zG1Y3X3nMSZJfNLkIRKhh8bRzfpQI1Dhl/Ss4q1b31g=; b=VNOLM+zTL6V57H8bqLfKna9YOndxEINm195K8gM5zq0Z9VQ1HBvfsKlsSRWPLO8K8V GQl9Xg/mk7f+b9jcbVKViX2vLfi0H3S6pZuw8LE6gBJaHOKaDspTUMayFAQM0TJDvfJS L06hdVEHVKGG3V0BSKWsbm4Y6hfoTIAyw5yX9ZxQW5ULjiewaOOz45s3TpeOxBe8u44g i9M+D8dusd020EL0wilBWyETXk457wMIDbia0yT2SJTUsHf5I2oXaaYom+AU10TVPmsu mT0JDU1hsz+KU0B3h/kX9tCyILH6wjSx9+iDNPl9HYgkevhgsSNj5/E2dnC+mGvhGWIr 6yOg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0qTpxV7ArBjkFqNetVSxF6i1CNYavoITuzpo9e50s9pRGt7OCzgal4i8mBFXtiQA==
X-Received: by 10.28.19.6 with SMTP id 6mr3426820wmt.96.1490111739160; Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:4d01:db10:6467:9610:5108:1941? ([2601:647:4d01:db10:6467:9610:5108:1941]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q4sm18148018wme.17.2017.03.21.08.55.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <DB69903C-28D7-49FF-A051-D27AE68E932A@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_617F8278-2516-4610-8EA5-DC712DA47759"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 08:55:34 -0700
In-Reply-To: <m2var2ej66.wl-randy@psg.com>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, iasa20@ietf.org
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
References: <148941528136.16867.3807046327704023886@ietfa.amsl.com> <2938563f-6ad6-57a8-122f-805b8cf41ed5@gmail.com> <A3C09A9E-AB39-4ABD-8B0B-76C7F3249C45@cooperw.in> <m2var2ej66.wl-randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/1df2l_OPj_st-K3e2pC3x6mwf0c>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] I-D Action: draft-hall-iasa20-workshops-report-00.txt
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions relating to reorganising the IETF administrative structures in the so called “IASA 2.0” project. <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2017 15:55:43 -0000

Randy,

> On Mar 21, 2017, at 8:36 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> 
>>> Better get used to it. Since the IETF is intentionally not incorporated
>>> and intentionally run by a rough consensus process, that line will never
>>> be clear-cut.
>> ...
>> One reason (of several) is the fact that the IAD is an ISOC employee
>> means that we end up relying on a multitude of ISOC staff and
>> resources solely for the purpose of administering the IETF, and much
>> of that reliance is not described or accounted for anywhere. If you
>> asked the average IETF participant how many ISOC staff the IAD
>> consults with or relies on for support of various kinds, what do you
>> think the answer would be? I can tell you that until a few weeks ago
>> my guess would have been way low. Their work in support of the IETF
>> isn’t documented anywhere, which is natural within the internal
>> context of ISOC because they are co-workers who are working with their
>> co-worker who happens to be the IAD. But because of the organizational
>> blurriness, their work is not transparent to the community.
> 
> to me, this is one of the few critical points.  i think the ietf
> benefits greatly by not having employees, directly handling cash, etc.
> to do so would put us in a very different world.  the tradeoff is a
> complex relationship with the isoc or whatever fronts for us.  if we
> de-fuzz and clean up that interface, it will be less uncomfortable and
> more transparent.

I agree, it looks to be getting better.  I note in the IETF 2017 Budget at

https://iaoc.ietf.org/documents/IETF-Budget-2017-28Sep16-FINAL.pdf

there is a large section called "ISOC Support Services”.  This apparently is accounting for what ISOC provides, and is more specific than what was done in earlier years.

Bob

> 
> another is the nomcom process, which has a bit of rationality as
> opposed to the popularity contests in organizations such as nanog.
> but i hope we're not reviewing that area of our structure in this
> pass.
> 
> randy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> iasa20@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email