Re: What to incorporate (Re: Options for IETF administrative restructuring)

On 2 sep 2004, at 07.11, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

>> Yes that would be helpful.
>
> Well, I don't agree. I think it would defocus the discussion (which
> is about putting the IETF's administration onto a business-like
> basis). IMHO the only case in which we should discuss the wider
> option is if the newtrk WG proposes changes in the standards process
> that would make such a thing necessary.

I guess I don't understand this comment.

As I see it, one reason for another option would have to do with the 
independence of the IETF to change its processes, should it want to.  
Not necessarily because it has a plan today to do so.

One of the concerns I have over the ISOC dependent mechanisms, which I 
guess is all of the presented options, is the link between budgeting 
and process.  If a process change requires a different form of 
budgeting support, would the IETF need the approval of ISOC to make 
that change?  Often what seems like a purely technical decision has 
policy and budgetary implications.  Assuming that we don't want to have 
reconsider the organizational relationship again in the near future, I 
believe we need to take such possibilities into account.

I think another consideration in making these administrative decisions 
has to do with the IETF's voice in the general standards and Internet 
governance arena.  Will ISOC, as a 'parent' organization - my 
interpretation of the options that are offered, be the responsible 
party for such activities?  E.g. currently for a liaison to the ITU, it 
is ISOC that is the liaison association.  Should ISOC disagree with the 
IETF position on a liaison matter who has the final say?  Likewise with 
the ongoing governance debate in the international arena, will ISOC or 
the IETF be the negotiating body?  And before we decide that this is 
just policy and does not relate to protocol issues, we should not 
ignore the intimate link between policy and technical - while it is not 
always direct, there generally is a technical implication in policy 
decisions and, generally,  also a policy impact in technical decisions. 
Basically I am concerned about the real independence of the IETF as a 
technical standards body when ISOC, which the IETF does not control, 
has the governing policy and financial voice.

I would be interested in seeing an analysis of an option which has the 
IETF as a independent nonprofit corporate entity.  This could be either 
as a wholly owned subsidiary of ISOC, thus keeping the fiduciary 
relationship, or as completely independent organization.

a.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf