Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy

Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 09 January 2020 14:54 UTC

Return-Path: <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84092120944; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 06:54:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 2bKpQLlAPyMB; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 06:54:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ed1-x52c.google.com (mail-ed1-x52c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1078F120934; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 06:54:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ed1-x52c.google.com with SMTP id t17so5839226eds.6; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 06:54:52 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=SgLF/Z9na83qPxU942H2jQv1zQDvCIftCTdUkuLAcv8=; b=e/Abp9dZ4g+a6JtVjveYoeEe8J7lQneXJcgoopLqS9GoCr/QLUK18Uityibv1Ry0dX dT+i1Qzt4hx9bRnULXfHEXOGY/chWBNVSZCNYJODpoTiop0rM07oy/I0439SVYiV13L3 rEobLpnD23y5MUkNxUNygkU6H2fVG/dZj2sJUz/RsC9kN6pPUNsR5QjZo3yccLS1EN1n 8KTYR21vrXgGqJ8vEoAsjGnz69rbdPkzmF2j0unZuXRKzT7soFfMDihpPORdHQiKMFdH zsDukCixvpJOh4713gWCO3jc0yvbhAnubGTp4xx/LnXZzJGXl6Uq6lFS6uSCpTTX/Vgk SbwQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=SgLF/Z9na83qPxU942H2jQv1zQDvCIftCTdUkuLAcv8=; b=QdPmrfLHFsJl31zPXtVzlyXRlheRKkaOuwX8urCPeHutRfWTcNZpHMUcaKhY0+9EOw U+FA4wHiQDJAKQRCBthY7BHDMEQCembJ5Bp7IO3yb93ADBa9mwUf27m0xvpcy3+Kaqfs 10iZfwDFYkceWQbp5X4Fabo1321/eiyWVBF6T9bvT68xjYqW5n28DhM4fLRSQMvVpn/G uQrl/oYXfYjur3AWPRe6WTdv9wOVixEMNnO2zy8JcUujjKwMIWPwQSCihsMOlZV4O6VX +r0+29emdq0rYileZjIJMI0F8bHRpclpqok1e27v/Q3wRq/l7XtUIYa7ZV6r/XdUTMtG ld6A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUayzLw3BOIOk+ZSzwvHkaNPms2wXk/yFFWnYXaDyJV/NPGGavP GXOaW9hRmW7XUWlyo/ZX3ncIQH+j35uETySp4ZXVkw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwpqaP5n5EDsA8bXpUDVondEU4+5Jtva/Ph7br06QvfBS6zTLHvyHOc4R1A2oYOgNTkBqZFSofCqVnCLdIQeWs=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1777:: with SMTP id da23mr11706125edb.292.1578581691423; Thu, 09 Jan 2020 06:54:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 06:54:50 -0800
From: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4e888f0a-a1e8-df72-cbbc-9a2e2f0d0d05@iab.org>
References: <4e888f0a-a1e8-df72-cbbc-9a2e2f0d0d05@iab.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 06:54:50 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMMESsxzMQNK2pCaOYyf7gviOz4Xy54_U9qSnv2S_zbc-E49Vg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy
To: architecture-discuss@ietf.org, IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>, iab@iab.org, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Z27zUcbo6Mg9PqhtBD7gwRfIDcg>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 14:54:57 -0000

On January 8, 2020 at 6:15:13 PM, IAB Chair wrote:

Hi!


> This policy covers the nomcom-selected Internet Architecture Board (IAB)
> members and ex-officio members (collectively, “Covered Individuals”). This
> policy has no impact on any other participants in IAB activities, for
> instance liaisons to and from the IAB or IAB program members.


I have two questions:

(1) Why are the liaison members of the IAB not included as Covered
Individuals?  rfc2850 treats both ex-officio and liaison members in
about the same way -- the only distinction that I could see is that
"an ex-officio position may be held by a full member" (§1.2).  Given
that all the other expectations for both are the same, I would like to
understand why the liaison members are not included in the policy if
they can participate in the IAB discussions.

(2) Liaison managers (to other organizations) represent the interests
of the IETF, should they be subject to a similar COI policy?  Maybe it
is not appropriate to include them in this specific policy, but I
didn't find anything in rfc4052 related to this point.

Thanks!

Alvaro.