Re: [Iasa20] Diagrams of current vs. Option 2/3

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Fri, 16 February 2018 21:01 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 29B4F128896 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:01:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 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_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=TkytnfKl; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=FoanjEln
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 ynQaWbjKdZAo for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:01:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E5C42126BF0 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:01:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6035520C81; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:01:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:01:05 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; bh=J0bSCPsNLkyAXTGh9x216iK5su3ZkloMwXLA9R5PL1k=; b=TkytnfKl nmxcz1r7alwxMoihuTySne7r+aSaQnkyt/ZsKaBhLBfXDtEc4xJn/sO8wmYy2Yos OPaCYfBPuAAP9BSjR0X0+vfJblH46wVLb2JU38ghexogLYVoWhzNX8Q7EM/0/zZV j7fPugePp/4e4A04cS38RwXx9vHibLPKEIur8ssC3+LRfO5vgkIVj3MsYsP3/v0J EBI297HnNPmy6xYCsdCXemUqfUJaYFguG5M4UFAbqzorYA1RfDGPKhZNTenaMCsY mXo++BPjrbxaxt0f2SED1NuAwpPX/7IJOQhrJRx6bhjBRoUqkQE68IBMY/Atw+MH Y7Dw4Wk6L0XC2g==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=J0bSCPsNLkyAXTGh9x216iK5su3Zk loMwXLA9R5PL1k=; b=FoanjElntuHu+PS1Gmu6cI8987WnRK0Y9CG+ghrnsvyLi k+QLmqC4OU9316KT76NQEamjl2iuFie2vyd6QzI7MDd/juz3HkdFP1usQIAUvIPG ExmvSYpsB3ATym1pixme105w/E3raqMS7hHHd2suNTFkr9iyHJzoDL672DdFov9g p8o1R0i5llAAHhrbo6VwKwmJRidrWUptkbiNdocAZLcdW+n03kMFqGjn9UlxRv/G /YoxK6tn+w1lC3kxZD40e3dKF5Mp5Co9tCgm3XaRjw6GryweQ01eA0R836MmQ48H 0JIMhyXxFPlQ458PHyPGnAMoL32XnfK6ytgfTtYpA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:kUaHWrDWkjaqNuCYi-g1Xe3HnTnoaWpx0LhwfoCorD3BojhMLcbFRA>
Received: from [10.154.180.46] (unknown [128.107.241.179]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BFCD02469C; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 16:01:04 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_EF3425E8-87E5-4ACC-ACDE-2CF430266843"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMCdr=FqAy6qxvKtsUq3B182Cyd0A+6GCTbaTaLZ3cp2YA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:01:03 -0800
Cc: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, iasa20@ietf.org
Message-Id: <2CA2CD55-9367-4282-8ED1-AE6B119D6505@cooperw.in>
References: <CAL02cgSDiUNJWnT28De1UbxjWTigyCztC1hQxb1bErhHrA4fLw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+9kkMCdr=FqAy6qxvKtsUq3B182Cyd0A+6GCTbaTaLZ3cp2YA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/QL_aFrrnHMgWBgSxj8dCmf7KKO0>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Diagrams of current vs. Option 2/3
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: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 21:01:08 -0000

> On Feb 16, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Richard,
> 
> I note that your diagram includes the IETF Trust, which is not part of this discussion since it already had a separate legal existence.  I think it would be cleaner to remove it, especially since the relationship is not that the IAOC administers the IETF Trust, as this diagram describes it.  The Trustees do; they simply are currently defined in terms of the trust.   I agree that this would need adjustment if the IAOC disappeared, but that's really a very separate question than the core of the IASA 2.0 work.  On a related note, the IAD also serves as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the IAOC (that's why the IAD is a Trustee). 

Agreeing with everything here, but I just wanted to note that in previous discussions folks have said “what about the Trust?” when contemplating various future scenarios. So we were trying to be responsive to that.

Alissa

> 
> Lastly, this is certainly one way to look at what might get created but it presumes some structures (like an advisory council and the IETF Admin Org board having some members selected by the board itself) which have not been in any of the proposals I've seen.  If the proposals out of the design team plan to include those, I think having them in drafts before London would be very useful.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> Ted
> 
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 10:01 AM, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx <mailto:rlb@ipv.sx>> wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> As we're considering the various options available, I thought I would play cartoonist again (after contributing [1] earlier) and share some diagrams of how processes might change if we go for one of the subsidiary options (II or III in the memo from the lawyers).  Based on a whiteboard that Alissa, Sean, and I sketched out one afternoon:
> 
> https://ipv.sx/iasa2.0/IASA-Strawman.pdf <https://ipv.sx/iasa2.0/IASA-Strawman.pdf>
> 
> Obviously, the details will need to change as a result of the legal discussion, but I thought it would be useful to illustrate one possible realization here.  
> 
> --Richard
> 
> [1] https://ipv.sx/iasa2.0/IASA-org-charts.pdf <https://ipv.sx/iasa2.0/IASA-org-charts.pdf>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> iasa20@ietf.org <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> iasa20@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20