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

Brian Carpenter <brian@cs.auckland.ac.nz> Thu, 15 February 2018 02:14 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 BF031126CD6 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:14:47 -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 UbVx6Njj-bqG for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:14:46 -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 C4495126D05 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 18:14:45 -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=1518660886; x=1550196886; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=LeNIyjMvgImZAP7fW6Gvmx/a92nf74LZJkm1gvX0emQ=; b=xr83+LK4aTBNBc7ePtOZugOomuBNgjZUAjG+GSmR+TO3nXq8AciLBQYL Z39e2xni2hPPbBocbjZqvp/Jc6WbbIj87ucV/scyEye8hniqdtIRtYJLD 8ftWXCyt58zNW8jA49JhnA/8tPrNcmtv+3+CfOJ2JqjY1VWpCXIn4l51f nv4vqqN/VqnMM8wwMgucBHSdMaJ5N6yCkzrRfiTXaej9sOF9pp9PLIsTB 2AgF2T3+KjTdi0g9aBvXQfHec6xz7iTMdxUc+PgxDMrzoSrhx7g6E70f2 +G+Ud7TedqaAcv1nGfeXT1YpkvGWxLwXfzmiFudisrr9SeWlB/lnsiJyU Q==;
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.46,515,1511780400"; d="scan'208";a="1435703"
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; 15 Feb 2018 15:14:43 +1300
To: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>, iasa20@ietf.org
References: <4483006c-1652-7340-19f8-8d0579af8213@cdt.org> <ac8f3a00-b22a-ff84-ba81-14e824697148@cs.tcd.ie> <CABtrr-Wo7Laxvcvf+rwJ9Yip9-T78tA2dGqborcWd4gt1FM9eQ@mail.gmail.com> <0ac3fbe1-aab6-a32a-951e-a9211ac14ab8@cs.auckland.ac.nz> <20180215015914.vgqgdpb5avtptaap@mx4.yitter.info>
From: Brian Carpenter <brian@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <e0c43d77-636f-8b5a-cde3-20443aabe5e4@cs.auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 15:14:51 +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: <20180215015914.vgqgdpb5avtptaap@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/zqRG6N5h6tguXIe4Fk9KpkVNrXA>
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: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 02:14:48 -0000

On 15/02/2018 14:59, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> Hi Brian (and Stephen too):
> 
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 02:25:30PM +1300, Brian Carpenter wrote:
>> I'm with Stephen, setting up a new org of any kind is unnecessary
>> and costly (in many ways). But absolutely certainly if we did go that
>> way, setting it upoutside US jurisdiction must be considered and is probably
>> preferable. Switzerland or the Netherlands are two obvious choices, but
>> of course the field is broad.
> 
> Does this include Joe's cases (2) and (3) as "new org of any kind"?
> Because I seem to recall that this makes things inordinately
> complicated (I recall this from when we investigated it as part of the
> ICANN/IANA changes).

IANAL, and I'm certainly not an international tax and corporate structure
lawyer. So while I believe it would be complicated, I don't know how much so.
(ISOC already has an office in Switzerland, of course.)

But given the international scope of the IETF, it would seem like an essential
part of due diligence to consider other jurisdictions than the US.

    Brian

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> A
>