(in advance of the I-D publication, it, and the diff files, are available from http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/adminrest/)
I believe that most if not all of these are issues for which there is rough consensus (or at least a feeling of "good enough"). I'll suggest some resolutions below; if people have serious objections to these, I think we should try for another rev before we send out the formal Last Call; if people think that the text as currently written is "good enough", we can follow the plan-as-of-last-week and send out the Last Call on Wednesday.
o Are designated donations specified appropriately? In particular, does requiring that donations not be "unduly restricted" address previously stated concerns? This is what the current text says. It is not yet clear whether the current text is acceptable to ISOC. We may need to check this with ISOC's accountants first.
I believe it is acceptable to the IETF; I don't speak for ISOC.
o It's not yet clear whether we have too much about the IAD task.
Should that task be specified elsewhere, initially by the
Transition Team, later by IAOC or some committee? We need people
to speak up on this. Is the current text OK?I believe the detail specified is appropriate for the BCP; the Transition Team is trying to describe the role in more detail as we speak.
o Would we want the IAOC to sign off on the yearly (or more
frequent) reports in some formal sense within a reasonable amount
of time? This might protect the IAD from some form of open-ended
lingering responsibility for previous years. It might also
protect against having somebody, five years from now, state "this
is wrong and oh by the way this was already wrong N years ago."I believe this is implied by the "review" clause in section 3.2; it would be strange to have the IAOC review the reports and then neither approve them nor give feedback. I think no more text is needed.
o How should we deal with conflicts between the IAD, the IAOC and
ISOC? This is complicated by the fact that ISOC officially
employs the IAD while a small committee hires and fires and
evaluates the IAD. No new discussion or text has come up since
draft version 01.I believe the text in the document adequately specifies what each party is responsible for, and if they keep within those spheres of responsibility, the risk of conflict is minimized. No new text needed.
o How should we deal with disagreements between the ISOC Board of
Trustees and the IAOC regarding business decisions, spending,
hiring, etc?Same thought as above. (I'm a bit nervous about this - we might want to work out arrangements later - but this may be something that we can do without embedding it in the core BCP)
o When do we do a check with accountants and legal advisors? Can
that be done during IETF Last Call, or must that happen first?I believe we can do this during Last Call - once it is clear what the IETF wants, it is easier to get the lawyers and accountants to make sure the language specifies that accordingly.
o The text on an appeal against the IAOC (Section 3.4 is pretty
fresh, and some seem to want to narrow down what can be appealed.
Not clear that we have consensus yet.Please - if someone does not want this - speak up!
Harald
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf