Re: [Iasa20] Memo exploring options for IASA 2.0 models

Brian Carpenter <brian@cs.auckland.ac.nz> Fri, 16 February 2018 21:20 UTC

Return-Path: <brian@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
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 C4A0312D7F4 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:20:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=auckland.ac.nz
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 6Z9WmyngYXsG for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:20:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz (mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.125.246]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CE3D12D7F2 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Fri, 16 Feb 2018 13:20:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=@auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=mail; t=1518816044; x=1550352044; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=OJ2+d7NIGH+zqovL3EQ7TzNz2qYIUeAONjeJAswKWYc=; b=ZbXrxErblCdqiajBDn3PBtq5UpG2EtHPJR2RaZLwl/d4DQLgBqFFB+9c 8txv4YPqddhfk/2HGSBRnyfFQ3z4A7oRIKpgui3UxrVFLBOnIcFacQi/C juMloJ+A+nWAmyhUo3EBsuX7wrh3AOikAwIGTUMnDDd+IqZIDPvtDdc7Y zlnkGpH/epmlwRuMz4/o1iWRvylczfkIh/DatROIclV4sukboxTRR9n9a /SkE5DuUuoZqesCLGFkui83zgs1ZiVmAsf6cN6jwCmLiYxkPQpsy7F8IJ npBUlmLeLTCuTqqzxDOepHPwkawafi2kiNSqiOvwAvTq0P7uANU+ujfn0 Q==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,520,1511780400"; d="scan'208";a="1617757"
X-Ironport-HAT: BAD-REPUTATION - $RELAY-AUTH-THROTTLE
X-Ironport-Source: 111.69.225.189 - Outgoing - Outgoing-SSL
Received: from 189.225.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz (HELO [192.168.178.30]) ([111.69.225.189]) by mx4-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP; 17 Feb 2018 10:20:41 +1300
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, iasa20@ietf.org
References: <4483006c-1652-7340-19f8-8d0579af8213@cdt.org> <20182.1518727709@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <C77B41DA-268D-4F0E-8AC8-F2E292E38B14@cooperw.in> <9631.1518800971@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <be961111-9bed-086e-a0ab-b220125a438d@cs.auckland.ac.nz> <20180216185551.cgigor7up7uowmr6@mx4.yitter.info> <40a7ffe5-8417-cfdf-15dc-6603a5c7978f@cs.auckland.ac.nz> <20180216192334.jjgn6bineinfofux@mx4.yitter.info>
From: Brian Carpenter <brian@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <5327daa0-1d54-f051-e620-7c8f4bdc4870@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 10:20:53 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180216192334.jjgn6bineinfofux@mx4.yitter.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/wJxa12NVStI4Tyk14wmOGZvG26M>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Memo exploring options for IASA 2.0 models
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 21:20:47 -0000

Andrew,

Yes, I have seen these arguments and I understand them. And I'm not
in the least criticising the I* for trying to find a fix. It's the
complexity and cost of the fix that concerns me.

Have we tried the cheap fix, which is a carefully written primer for
potential sponsors? 

Regards
   Brian
On 17/02/2018 08:23, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 17, 2018 at 08:07:46AM +1300, Brian Carpenter wrote:
>>
>> But the only concrete example I've seen is the minor hassle that ekr
>> just mentioned.
> 
> If you haven't seen them, then it seems it's because you're not
> reading the examples already raised.  But, for instance,
> 
> 	- because the contracts have to be between ISOC and others, the
> 	signing authority must be employed by ISOC, not us.
> 
> 	- because the contracts are let by ISOC, it appears to donors and
> 	sponsors that money to the IETF is fungible funds given to ISOC.
> 
> 	- it causes confusion among vendors as to whom they are dealing
> 	with.
> 
> 	- the minor hassle could actually lead to a large hassle in a
> 	future case so far unexperienced.
> 
> Having the ability to make decisions independently comes with some
> costs. It seems plain you don't think those costs are worth bearing,
> but I also think it is unfair for you to dismiss the issues others
> have raised as being "minor hassles".  You're not now the one who
> faces the community when things don't happen because ISOC's needs and
> the IETF's needs are imperfectly aligned.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
>