Inline > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of > John C Klensin > Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 18:41 > To: Scott Bradner; ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Issue #727: Section 2.2, 4, & 7 - Miscellaneous & editorial > > --On Sunday, 02 January, 2005 08:19 -0500 Scott Bradner > <sob@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > brian asks > >> Perhaps we do indeed need to explicitly limit the > >> IAOC Chair to chairing the IAOC. But we almost do - the > >> following paragraph says: > >> > >> The chair of the IAOC shall have the authority to manage > >> the activities and meetings of the IAOC. The IAOC Chair > >> has no formal duty to represent the IAOC, except as > >> directed by IAOC consensus. > >> > >> Isn't this enough? > > > > maybe the 2nd sentence change to > > > > The IAOC Chair does not represent the IAOC (unless directed > > to do so by IAOC consensus) and does not represent the IETF. > > > > "no formal duty" leaves the IAOC chair to do so anyway and it > > would be good, in the same place, to say that the IAOC chair > > does not represent the IETF > > Yes. "no formal duty" implies that all sorts of representations > can be made and done, it just does not _require_ the Chair to do > it. As Margaret points out, large dragons have walked through > smaller loopholes in the IETF. Scott's proposed sentence is > _much_ better. > So why not: The IAOC Chair does not represent the IAOC (unless directed to do so by IAOC consensus) and does not represent the IETF. The IAOX chair also does not erpresent: - The IESG - The IAB - The IPCDN WG - The IRTF - The UN - The ITU - The ITU-T SG4 etc etc tec Of course I am kidding... but I think the current text is fine. (my personal opinion of course). Bert > john _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf