IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)" <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.com> Thu, 09 January 2020 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.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 D1E611207FB; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 12:19:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nbcuni.onmicrosoft.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 YmAPbFHCOA0R; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 12:19:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00176a04.pphosted.com (mx0a-00176a04.pphosted.com [67.231.149.53]) (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 8B242120047; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 12:19:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0048276.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0048276.ppops.net-00176a04. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 009KI1cj021440; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:19:43 -0500
Received: from usushmgip001.mail.tfayd.com ([216.178.109.235]) by m0048276.ppops.net-00176a04. with ESMTP id 2xamh1wfy1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 09 Jan 2020 15:19:43 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO ashemwp00047.mail.tfayd.com) ([10.40.33.204]) by usushmgip001.mail.tfayd.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2020 12:19:41 -0800
Received: from ashemwp00012.mail.tfayd.com (100.126.24.36) by ashemwp00048.mail.tfayd.com (100.126.24.72) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.669.32; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:19:40 -0500
Received: from ashemwp00001.mail.tfayd.com (100.126.24.25) by ashemwp00012.mail.tfayd.com (100.126.24.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.669.32; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:19:39 -0500
Received: from NAM11-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (10.40.78.204) by ashemwp00001.mail.tfayd.com (100.126.24.25) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.669.32 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 15:19:39 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=WEwqFS1UrJ2Z43eQ6R0NUcIJSS2xZ1Ivp4v0Q6FctoO5F73GcDJKu+wc1T8J0rmUUGT66EkaEnwG9rLDnMsehlBo2Dymp3QHIvUab8s27e+lLStV7nwHFcQR2K+Gnhxl++h8N+Ydd97JNTCCoxYmZoFDlG1L2pv3RlxNcnbF2+f9iDdx/zH2bkMgMJJC5AwHKuLxhJOn4eF7sogpyEIWqAQ28zcuCXDFF3MwiWuy/RIwdIcMsy8NssXkXHdG8IYdG0BiZ4EG+19aAyVo1y++lQ9I0C3xzzprqN52T6ZVTzmiagtPaCdNcJ7eeu6g5OVfOcAENwaB7DrqcuRhjexuDw==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=2AIwWNIiBjOoTXg/pORE9wZ5pC2clVjIh937XVno5hY=; b=iszzaZNQ+vr5xgocbbI6ASk+/TUWBgVPxdFhp+vyD8Dqbz4Y4J0Qq8IJSGIZ+GbJmnQY1+dqOrCwxCCur+gtN/r5gdEd+oq5qhgCiOYfeqr0Kx+/gjYbaUopfUlWRqegAUrbmD9S4wkxH3mzVFz4dsq7+qQ0DnPaluNt5v9HQHj28yaTOMx9FqZosJfH1lMV6Kx/8BaAJO3DiJx8QTyIL9B2TFMz6N7k2i+drRvNkOXI5GQvfmcgTWQUK0SyuXR1KXsbWs+gFmEVdQeEmjEM51pSI2hwm9FuSGh5lEcCSKqTLOAnTkD4CF8tV29LWu8XLC7OV8L2HrIzndj0fdx/Jw==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nbcuni.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nbcuni.com; dkim=pass header.d=nbcuni.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=NBCUNI.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-NBCUNI-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=2AIwWNIiBjOoTXg/pORE9wZ5pC2clVjIh937XVno5hY=; b=lLkjWUhMeEW5VmTK2g9fp/6qYD/9K5datUxKOccomHbwIn0xs7vNipnJUh1lAlp6eMdpE9BD/YV7rQsHBaGLTmPajMbw95FpowiGxb1vmHncusSAvvOvLCcJYaw0JCFyoySfUuafgSDjHbY8tA3LxB9Qvdpy3D5Bkb/8f0aHybM=
Received: from DM6PR14MB3993.namprd14.prod.outlook.com (10.141.186.71) by DM6PR14MB2138.namprd14.prod.outlook.com (20.176.89.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2623.9; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 20:19:38 +0000
Received: from DM6PR14MB3993.namprd14.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c3a:8cf7:ed09:9592]) by DM6PR14MB3993.namprd14.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::1c3a:8cf7:ed09:9592%5]) with mapi id 15.20.2623.010; Thu, 9 Jan 2020 20:19:38 +0000
From: "Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)" <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.com>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@comcast.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
CC: IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>, IAB IAB <iab@iab.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, "architecture-discuss@ietf.org" <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>, "Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)" <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.com>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy
Thread-Topic: [EXTERNAL] Re: [arch-d] Draft IAB conflict of interest policy
Thread-Index: AQHVxyoembeUp/4Pp02qBY4US3O0UA==
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2020 20:19:38 +0000
Message-ID: <52B13773-88C3-490D-8003-475F845F1ACB@nbcuni.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.20.0.191208
x-originating-ip: [108.185.101.45]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 63d4707b-f632-4bc0-c7b0-08d7954140a8
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR14MB2138:
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR14MB213859063489671DAB2B743DE2390@DM6PR14MB2138.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508;
x-forefront-prvs: 02778BF158
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(366004)(136003)(376002)(39860400002)(396003)(346002)(189003)(199004)(71200400001)(107886003)(4326008)(66446008)(8676002)(81156014)(36756003)(966005)(6486002)(6506007)(478600001)(64756008)(2616005)(81166006)(186003)(66556008)(91956017)(316002)(2906002)(33656002)(76116006)(66476007)(86362001)(26005)(66946007)(6512007)(5660300002)(110136005)(54906003)(8936002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR14MB2138; H:DM6PR14MB3993.namprd14.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: nbcuni.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: yMlThIaN3FICTmA2kVvpjNs3YicjObgcRD/GSQJwzGFnbedsbxO8SaMw8zwjeVbBVjgcGcOX9E4fGPqrOAgtUHYAz8dl1Vfgsk9hT+W7FBNwe8JtLSux5MgnnJESfkntn9LPjYHcklISRsXxT1n+MKYAqXh5usz01B79XkDgUfYfbqU0xRkeD6cAFq0mM3hoimF9o97yUJqTxZ9YCf30vu/MFJapzTZ+aDw8XyjxljBgAXNX7qZZiJPEF4EMswzkpjdXO8fRz6VExl17IkOMRsAkEDpotRD3w67LUDkEVDU4MfMArlIMcGcY66+WVAZXbA8GSeQyz4WO871k+IWa9LLwK3oICN96Gn88V+Ey/8cDjU47hF1JDVsDsLsER9JQ1R9swlypM00GXCstTleq6kceOo5YUbONbvgCid7o/xm49cIxJruFknrKJZ1UtbeFIIJgu+rRWWcNSmsqVS3n7+FjVHBgesADkxYU9qrvHpnVkUXUTLi9SIrBQho3/UDvEORa5S/f914euJbxN/rNEw==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <5256406D18E5F04F88209FE4E3CF51E7@namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 63d4707b-f632-4bc0-c7b0-08d7954140a8
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Jan 2020 20:19:38.5295 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4f3526f9-97d6-412d-933a-4e30a73110f4
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: BPwjPrHo1OFG1ToX8mJHTYvcijiUhLjMH2soGFGSy2hVBe2BbRBM5QaBqOWTGdnun/DLMETpEmg/f/KXzCZSKw==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR14MB2138
X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 47edc00f-f2d6-45ef-be83-8a353bd47e45
X-OriginatorOrg: nbcuni.com
X-CFilter-Loop: Forward
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.572 definitions=2020-01-09_04:2020-01-09, 2020-01-09 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-2001090166
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/n5sGb4gaiaW2kdQmcY6VoFUNnm0>
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 20:19:48 -0000


On 1/9/20, 12:08 PM, "Architecture-discuss on behalf of Livingood, Jason" <architecture-discuss-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of Jason_Livingood@comcast.com> wrote:

    From: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
    > I agree with that for the IESG, but the IAB is not usually in a position to approve or block specific technical decisions. Yes, it sets architectural direction, but see Richard’s comment down-thread.
    
    [JL] Perhaps we are thinking too narrowly about what the IAB does? Here are some areas for potential conflict that are unrelated to architectural direction:
    1 - Confirming the IETF Chair and Area Directors
    2 - Standards appeals
    3 - RFC Series
    4 - Liaison roles
    5 - Advice to ISOC

[GD] + 6 - Appoint an ISOC Trustee 
    
    [JL] Even in architectural oversight, what if there was a strong push for a particular approach against a particular protocol or codec and someone on the IAB had an undisclosed financial stake in a patent pool that would directly benefit from a certain decision? Or if they "worked" for a university but were 100% funded by a grant from a government that was underwriting their time specifically to work against a specific upgrade to encryption? Or whatever other cases you might imagine.
    
    [JL] So IMO it seems like some CoI policy for the IAB is better than no CoI policy.
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    Architecture-discuss mailing list
    Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
    https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss__;!!PIZeeW5wscynRQ!8O2iCzgeSlI5bAPaoLgo-80K8IGXap8sIDzyMyfHcyTaVjxMG_zUxVDXLqj3Nid1$

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email