Re: [Iasa20] IASA 2.0 outcome properties

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Mon, 24 April 2017 03:56 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 4EDE4126CF6 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 20:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 r0nL7Xe3FbPp for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 20:56:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C63C1250B8 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Sun, 23 Apr 2017 20:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 793C9BE2E; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 04:56:09 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VE6OJJOWZJoB; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 04:56:03 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.244.2.100] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5930BE49; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 04:56:00 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1493006163; bh=h9K82CSOLj5I5ptdrX/p0qxPfbYSNPg2V2JX2meEu0A=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=I37TC59blvp5OGjiHakcLM9yckR75mcTBKrW1BSvbJdl8pOzWIRK3bEdVhNQjfryd ZlhU/8OXHALJ/c6oZXIk7SSesTvSUZCVMvDxSdeQbzqMAjQ3+gz0y3DE9wSyof0lJV tR2nVDo3A31KRaxjq9BsvZ1E41D+946GML/YcYBg=
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
References: <42E39015-D0B6-4464-8792-9F3A7089975F@cooperw.in> <d3b3bdd0-5da1-7893-e162-7a7a61cd0a0a@cs.tcd.ie> <258772C5-ED70-4AE2-8BDD-2DF149239B30@cooperw.in> <ac959891-8992-f87c-d730-e815a7542a72@cs.tcd.ie> <36C81989-749C-4E1C-8625-EB9894B868F4@cooperw.in>
Cc: iasa20@ietf.org
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <83ebd3dd-b36c-c53b-c636-3e8db2196802@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 04:55:57 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <36C81989-749C-4E1C-8625-EB9894B868F4@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="6T6753C0JmvGUlWcumRsFMF9m2VamCEKU"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/OYs0yK7czbTgwDoa-IFiC2VByBs>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] IASA 2.0 outcome properties
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: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 03:56:20 -0000


On 24/04/17 02:18, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> One observation about your formulation here, since you’ve used it a
> couple of times: incorporation is distinct from membership. That is,
> there are a number of models in which an organization can incorporate
> that do not involve membership of any sort; a membership corporation
> is just one of many kinds of corporate structure. I appreciate that
> people see downsides (and upsides) to both incorporation and
> membership, but I think in this discussion it would be useful to
> treat them separately, since we may end up drawing different
> conclusions about each.

Agreed - as we tease out these issues, incorporation and membership
are separate things. However, there are roads we might follow that
lead to one or both of those happening without them being "the plan"
and I do think we ought avoid such roads except where we've put up
very large and glaring signposts ahead of time, and where the
community have clearly consciously chosen to take that danger-sign
laden road.

Cheers,
S.