Re: [Iasa20] [EXTERNAL] Re: AD review of draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc4071bis-04

["Livingood, Jason" <[e-mail]>]

I understand the need to ensure these are aligned. The language is quite short and was intended as a summary for people who don’t want to read another document. If 2031bis changes during the review process, this would correspondingly change. Looking at the text (pasted below), the 1st paragraph is verbatim from Section 2 of 2031bis. Are you suggesting deletion of the 2nd paragraph or removal of the entire section (I'm not clear what action you suggest)?

JL

From the current doc:
Principles of the IETF and ISOC Relationship
ISOC and the IETF have historically been philosophically aligned. The principles of the relationship between the IETF and ISOC are outlined in {{?I-D.ietf-iasa2-rfc2031bis}}. ISOC's connection with the IETF community has always played an important role in its policy work. ISOC has always been an advocate for multistakeholder processes, which includes the technical community. Open standards are an explicit part of one of the focus areas in ISOC's mission: Advancing the development and application of Internet infrastructure, technologies, and open standards.

On a practical level, the IETF LLC is a distinct entity (a disregarded entity) of ISOC. The IETF remains responsible for the development and quality of the Internet Standards. ISOC aids the IETF by providing it a legal entity within which the IETF LLC exists, as well as with financial support. ISOC has no influence whatsoever on the technical content of Internet Standards.

On 2/25/19, 2:03 AM, "Alissa Cooper" <[e-mail]> wrote:

    
    
    > On Feb 24, 2019, at 3:45 PM, Livingood, Jason <[e-mail]> wrote:
    > 
    > [JL] I am working on edits now in response to your list. I will comment as/if needed as I go. Here is one:
    >> == Section 3.5 ==
    >> Since we have an entire document about the IETF-ISOC relationship (draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc2031bis), why is this section needed?
    > 
    > [JL] It is a very short section - a few sentences. The idea was to give a quick sense of the IETF-ISOC relationship at a high level - so folks need not necessarily read the other longer document to see all the details. 
    
    Ok. The issue I see is that we will end up with two documents that say slightly different things, and people who have to interpret this later will wonder whether those distinctions are meaningful. The first paragraph of 3.5 is copied verbatim from 2031bis, so if that text changes before 2031bis is approved, there will be discrepancies. The second paragraph does not seem to come from 2031bis, and IIRC the WG spent quite some time settling on the precise language to use there to describe the legal relationship between the two entities. I would suggest just linking to specific sections of 2031bis so people can find the relevant bits when they need to.
    
    Thanks,
    Alissa
    
    > 
    > 
    > 
    >