What label would you use? And how does it describe something different from contracting?
How about "parent organization"?
I prefer the term "organizational home", because it doesn't raise the issue of who conceived whom. But, close enough.
As far as the organizational chart goes, I'll take that request as feedback for the "Scenario O" derived BCP or other follow-on documents. The original Scenario O proposal tried (but apparently failed) to make the following structure clear:
[Please note that I am simply attempting to summarize Scenario O, not to make an pronouncements about how things must be. This is all subject to community review and consensus.]
The IETF Administrative Directory (IAD) is a full-time employee of ISOC selected and reviewed by a subset of the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC), including at a minimum the ISOC President/CEO and IETF Chair. The IAD reports to the full IAOC, although it is likely that the IAOC will delegate week-to-week or month-to-month management of the IAD (as appropriate) to a subset of the full IAOC (their decision).
Members of the IAOC are largely volunteers selected by the IETF. Three are selected by the IETF NomCom (including the IETF Chair Ex Officio), one is selected by the IESG, one by the IAB, and two by the ISOC Board (including the ISOC President/CEO ex officio). In this role, the IAOC members are accountable to, and report to, the IETF community. None of these details are nailed down, though, so please make suggestions if you think that this group should be comprised differently.
It is a responsibility of the IAD to develop an IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) budget that is approved by both the IAOC and the ISOC Board. Other than budget approval and whatever financial controls, budget tracking or financial reporting the ISOC Board deems appropriate, the ISOC Board has no direct management responsibilities for IASA or the IAD.
If you still consider that to be unclear, perhaps you could provide an "organizational chart" for some portion of the current IETF leadership, and I could use that as a guide for constructing one for the IASA?
For those of you who may be interested, there is an issue tracker queue for specific issues with the Scenario 0 proposal. It is available at https://rt.psg.com (user: ietf, passwd: ietf), and the queue is named "scenario-o". We're tracking these issues for resolution in a "Scenario O"-based BCP or other follow-on documents. Please let me know if we have missed any specific issues that have been reported regarding the Scenario O proposal.
Thanks, Margaret
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf