Some comments, using Harald's diff as a starting point.
ISOC has proposed this:
This document describes the structure of the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) as an IETF-managed activity housed within the Internet Society (ISOC).
to replace this:
This document describes the structure of the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) as an IETF-controlled activity housed within the Internet Society (ISOC) legal umbrella.
Speaking personally, I strongly prefer "controlled" to "managed", and I believe that the formulations we've used up to now intended the "under ISOC's wing" view that "IETF-controlled" implies. Changing it weakens a formulation that is core to the community consensus that we've built over time, and I don't think it is a good idea.
ISOC has proposed this:
Should the IETF standards process at some future date come to include
other technical activities, the IASA shall use reasonable efforts to
provide administrative support for those activities as well.to replace this:
Should the IETF standards process at some future date come to include other
technical activities, the IASA shall provide administrative support
for those activities as well.
I can see the desire not to write blank checks, and I suspect the concern on ISOC's part is that saying IASA provides for support for futuredtechnical activities implies such a blank check. I think "use reasonable efforts" is the wrong set of weasel words, though, as it implies that the IASA (in some vague fashion) gets to decide what those efforts are. May I suggest the following instead:
Should the IETF standards process change over time, the IAOC will work
with the IETF community and ISOC BoT to adapt its support so that new
support activities can be managed under the IASA function.That's not a blank check, it gets across the idea that new functions stay under IASA/ISOC and don't go elsewhere, and it focuses the adaptation on the IAOC as a body (rather than IASA as a function).
In a related note, the proposed changes shift "use reasonable efforts" to "commercially reasonable efforts" in the following:
The IASA expects ISOC to use commercially reasonable efforts to build and provide that operational reserve, through whatever mechanisms ISOC deems appropriate.
I am not sure what, if any, specific meaning this change implies, but I find it odd that it should occur here and not in the other areas. I also found it odd when thinking of a nonprofit (this is likely due to my ignorance of the term's usage). But I have expected from other communication that explicit fund-raising efforts might go into this process of building a reserve, and it would be nice to have it clarified that efforts of that nature fall into "commercially reasonable". Alternatively, using "use reasonable efforts" in the above makes sense, since a fund-raising entities reasonable efforts pretty likely include things like endowment/capital campaigns and the like.
ISOC proposes to replace this:
Within the constraints outlined above, all other details of how to
structure this activity within ISOC (whether as a cost center, a
department, or a formal subsidiary) shall be determined by ISOC in
consultation with the IAOC.
with this:
Within the constraints outlined above, all other details of how to
structure this activity within ISOC (whether as a cost center, a
division, or a wholly controlled affiliate) shall be determined by
ISOC in consultation with the IAOC.Again, I am not an expert here, but my reading of "formal subsidiary" and "wholly controlled affiliate" is not the same. The issue of control is a very sensitive one here, and I strongly suggest not using the term "control" here unless there is an extraordinarily strong reason to do so. This activity is controlled by the IETF in partnership with ISOC, through the offices of the IAOC. If there are other terms available that do not muddy those waters, I would strongly prefer that they are used.
Speaking personally, best regards, Ted Hardie
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf