Re: On the difference between scenarios A and B in Carl's

> >>  Putting the IETF administrative function under ISOC requires a
> >>  documented IETF-ISOC agreement (call it an MoU, a contract or
> >>  something else - it IS a document, it IS an agreement and it DOES
> >>  have two parties).
> 
> 
> Its easy to identify the first party to this MoU - its ISOC, but, in a 
> formal sense,  who would be the second party? [...]
> 
> It appears to me that if we are heading down the contract / MoU path we
> have already implicitly set up the IETF as its own entity, and are now
> undertaking an outsourcing function to sub-contract activities to another
> entity.
> 
> ...

and what is the relationship of an ietf participant to that entity?  will
we be "members" of the "ietf association"?  isoc has members.  usenix has
members.  ietf eschews not only voting, but membership and classification.
is that time over?
-- 
Paul Vixie

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