Re: I-D Action: draft-hardie-iaoc-iab-update-00.txt

Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net> Tue, 02 February 2016 21:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mstjohns@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C49B01A0022 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 13:45:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 DuhIez5W9H56 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 13:45:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68EB61A001B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 13:45:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from resomta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.104]) by resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id DZkH1s0012Fh1PH01ZlAaN; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 21:45:10 +0000
Received: from [IPv6:2601:148:c000:48c8:9013:9345:289c:d243] ([IPv6:2601:148:c000:48c8:9013:9345:289c:d243]) by resomta-ch2-08v.sys.comcast.net with comcast id DZlA1s0084GFGjb01ZlAKe; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 21:45:10 +0000
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-hardie-iaoc-iab-update-00.txt
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <20160202182036.26498.27650.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56B10131.7040603@gmail.com> <C8F5EEE2CF0CBC7E3BB44477@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
From: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <56B12368.2070609@comcast.net>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 16:45:12 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C8F5EEE2CF0CBC7E3BB44477@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20140121; t=1454449510; bh=2rTOHBdsJlsy5zceQ4Hl+B+aFqoEQ/33mSX/Mw0z4m4=; h=Received:Received:Subject:To:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=DJEE0Z+4LvyVXQbJAP3ysBcRHI+belDqk+NuKORultjJp9ho42jiLUGnjjrA7ZzMB q+7uo5lm5VBL/ULbPpAYIvXnI4BJOItUF01OOnXIxCAKOfZ1XEHUidNRAusAi7vJxO tujHRasSWwG30w/YCK/4J6rzQ6HY+pIhUUlxQlXJM6SDjI/MOZbPOKJNQR6ts4kxkJ OHgEQ0jHd34zcj1vbc2ieQz+O/l1ultSovV2vwkmmqfXtl0Sv4cAb8Gcql0hBkeD2w JLBkFUQtWe4KkbldN50FYEevL8dfETvoOLU4D2uXmGjHRVkPZ3UQrudQNYztFjnWOI 4/JZaOeAsBzMg==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/LAvDx-bBkmXi1EHpbWWlLNgi0cM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2016 21:45:12 -0000

On 2/2/2016 4:05 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
> In particular, some of us believe that the IAOC is not
> working very well and that some reforms in the direction of
> getting more people on it who have the IAOC among their primary
> commitments rather than as a required side-effect of some other
> (and very time-consuming) position.


The above is probably a better way of framing the problem than "the IAB 
chair has too much to do".

Let me suggest that instead of delegating the IAB chair responsibilities 
we, instead, change the ex-officio status that the various chairs 
currently have to observer status, change the organizational appointees 
to permit (require?) appointment from their appointing organizations, 
and  also add two or three additional permanent members to the IAOC, 
those members to be selected in alternate years by the Nomcom.


To head off a few arguments against:

1) "But that reduces the IAB's influence on the IAOC".  Answer (1): 
Members of the IAOC serve as individuals.  It's unclear that a different 
member of the IAB will vote directly as the IAB chair wants them to vote 
in any case.  Answer(2): As John noted, the environments that existed 
when we created the IAOC and that exist now differ.  Does the original 
power structure still make sense (e.g. with an IAB, ISOC and IESG 
effectively owning 6 votes of 8?).

2) "Doesn't a larger IAOC mean a more unwieldy organization". Answer:  
The ex-officio chairs now move to observer status and can attend as they 
wish.  The number of voting members remains the same.  The members 
appointed by/related to a specific organization get reduced to 3 of 7 or 
3 of 8 voting members.  Ideally, the appointed organizational voting 
members have the IAOC as one of their primary tasks and would address 
the concern that the "IAB chair has too much to do".

AIRC, any change to the composition of the IAOC is also going to end up 
affecting the membership of the IETF trust as well.

Later, Mike