John C Klensin wrote:
--On Monday, 07 April, 2008 16:55 -0400 Ray Pelletier
<rpelletier@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Fred Baker wrote:
On Apr 3, 2008, at 1:54 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
Probably the Trust and/or IAOC procedures or charter should
be modified so that, in the event of the demise of the
IAOC, the Trust falls firmly under direct IETF control
(unless the IETF itself ceases to exist).
The concept makes sense to me, but I'd be interested to
understand how that would be implemented. All decisions of
the trust happen in discussions on the IETF mailing list,
and the consensus of the community as determined by J i m F
l e m i n g rules?
As Jorge pointed out:
This is covered by Section 6.1(c) of the Trust Agreement. If
there are ever fewer than 3 Trustees, the IESG will appoint new
Trustees. The existing Trustees do NOT become "permanent
appointments"
if the IAOC is dissolved. Rather, the IESG would appoint 3
Trustees
until the IAOC or some successor is constituted.
But this is inconsistent with the text that you circulated,
which said, in part,...
"If at any time the IAOC ceases to exist, the Trustees
then in office shall remain in office and determine the
future of the Trust in accordance with the Trust
Agreement."
A common-sense reading of that statement says that, if the IAOC
disappears, all Trustees stay in office and make decisions about
the trust. Jorge's comment and the Trust agreement seem to say
that, if the IAOC ceases to exist, the Trustees (with the
possible exception of the ISOC two) cease to be Trustees and it
is then the responsibility of the IESG to appoint new Trustees
who would "determine the future of the Trust".
All I'm asking about this is what others have asked -- that the
text you propose (and any related administrative procedures that
the Trustees have agreed on) be brought into line with the clear
intent of the Trust and IAOC agreements.
And that will be done,
Ray
john
|
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf