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

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 2:40 PM Joe Touch <[e-mail]> wrote:

> On 2020-01-09 10:46, Eric Rescorla wrote:
>
> I concur with Richard here. The IETF is most successful when we get
> input from people who are directly involved in the technologies that
> we are standardizing, but of course that very often means that they
> are working on those technologies for their employer. And indeed
> one of the criteria we often use to ask whether someone is a good
> fit for leadership is whether they have this kind of non-standards
> "day job" expertise.
>
>
>
> That, IMO, is why we encourage their participation in WG discussions and
> on lists.
>
> But it is dangerous to have those parties directly involved in decision
> making. The actual and potential COI (esp. perceived potential COI)
> undermine the decisions made - even when those decisions are otherwise
> reasonable.
>
> I.e., think of this as protecting the value of IAB decisions (and, as Ben
> noted, there are many, esp. during appeals, that are of a substantive
> nature that COI benefits).
>

And yet we routinely allow have WG chairs and ADs who are deeply involved
(and whose employers are deeply involved) in the technologies that are
being standardized.

-Ekr


> Joe
>
>
>