Re: Correcting errors about IETF [Re: Fwd: Can the USA welcome IETF]

At 10:50 18/10/2005, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>The IETF is not a subsidiary of the Internet Society
>and is not incorporated.

The aftermath of RFC 3066 bis have transformed the IETF in a virulent 
UN meeting. You will note that I did not share in a debate which is 
now an IETF DoS, while the Chair tries to move PECSI ahead, and the 
WSIS meeting is in less than one month. You may also want to note who 
has triggered such a so well timed "pro statu quo ante" situation.

This only documents my (and IAB's RFC 3869) point: addressing 
Governments and Global community level issues, such as 
multilingualism, multiculturation, multilateralism and global 
civil-rights from an exclusive commercial computer point of view , 
like proposed by RFC 3066 bis, may not be the best idea.

Anyway, I would suggest we stop this deafening pseudo legal blabla. 
And get real, transparent and clear. This would put people in front 
of their responsibilities:

1. what is the legal status of the IETF?
2. who is its legal representative?
3. what is its legal address?
4. what is its jurisdiction?

It seems that there can be only two liable representatives for IETF: 
an incorporated structure or yourself (partly with IESG and IAB Members).

1. ISOC says: "ISOC is the organizational home of the Internet 
Engineering Task Force, the Internet Architecture Board, the Internet 
Engineering Steering Group, and the Internet Research Task Force. 
Specific activities include support for the RFC Editor Function of the IETF."
2. you say "IETF is not a subsidiary of ISOC and is not incorporated".

For the rest, "is there an international lawyer on board?".
Please do not feed the "ianalists".
Let concerned people call their attorney and let return to technical issues.
jfc

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