RE: Proposed Revisions to IETF Trust Administrative Procedures

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 09 April 2008 19:04 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09EB728C2CB; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:04:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18BBF3A6F0D for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:04:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.146
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.146 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.453, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OfJze5xch+FF for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:04:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63AFF28C261 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Apr 2008 12:04:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=p3.JCK.COM) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Jjfb3-00018W-Gl; Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:04:37 -0400
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:04:36 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Ed Juskevicius <edj@nortel.com>
Subject: RE: Proposed Revisions to IETF Trust Administrative Procedures
Message-ID: <3835AFBD96412EAF1839026B@p3.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <0BDFFF51DC89434FA33F8B37FCE363D511F94E4E@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com>
References: <20080407194507.44B6028C21E@core3.amsl.com> <CAB795A3F7B5B1851E831FBB@beethoven.local> <0BDFFF51DC89434FA33F8B37FCE363D511F94E2B@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <E974AC59312981BA5F1A1364@p3.JCK.COM> <47FC2355.9030505@gmail.com> <33EDFDB1A6BB5C5B68362C2C@p3.JCK.COM> <405E5ABA-C7C2-4A2A-8840-84A3860443AA@multicasttech.com> <BE553BCE544B8A70231137C9@p3.JCK.COM> <0BDFFF51DC89434FA33F8B37FCE363D511F94E4E@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>, IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org


--On Wednesday, 09 April, 2008 13:50 -0400 Ed Juskevicius
<edj@nortel.com> wrote:

> John, you wrote:
> 
>> Then recommend to the community that the Trust Agreement be
>> changed.
> 
> The Trustees are not talking about changing the terms of the
> Trust Agreement, so this should not be necessary.

Good.  But I was just trying to suggest, following what I
thought I saw in Marshall's note, that, if the Trust Agreement
is defective, one could try to change it.  The other option is
to conform to it.  Ignoring it and adopting procedures or
polices inconsistent with it --even if one believes those
policies will never be triggered-- is a non-starter.
 
>> I am worried about the IAOC and/or Trustees adopting
>> procedures that are inconsistent with the Trust Agreement.
> 
> Me too! It is not the intention of the Trustees to adopt
> procedures that are inconsistent with the Trust Agreement.  
>  
>> if anything is going to be said, it needs to be consistent
>> with the Trust Agreement _and_ reflect the desires and intent
>> of the community.
> 
> I agree.

I think we are in synch.

    john

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf