Suggest no change: #739 Assuring ISOC commitment to AdminRest

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I believe #739 is a matter that requires ISOC to form an opinion - it is 
not something that the IETF needs to come to consensus about, and it should 
not affect the text of the BCP.

As Brian Carpenter said:

> I'm not saying a bylaw change would be a bad thing, in due time.
> But ISOC can get a Board motion through in about 2 weeks, whereas a bylaw
> change takes several months. Making it a prerequisite would cause us
> to lose precious time.

And the ISOC BoT has plenty of stuff on its plate just caring for the rest 
of the effects of this process, if I understand Steve Crocker correctly.

I suggest that we close this ticket as "no change required" - the issue 
will not be forgotten, but it should not affect this document.

                 Harald



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf