[as editor:]
It seems that the high order bit of this discussion circles around the question on whether it a requirement for the IETF Chair to have a voting position in order to effectively perform oversight. Once we figured out where we want to go with that we can think about delegation by the chair vs appointment by the bodies and the implementation details with respect to the trust.
[as olaf:]
I agree that the IETF chair needs to have a good oversight about what goes on in the IETF, to a lesser extend it is good that the IAB has that oversight too (specifically with respect to its chartered responsibilities) but I wonder if a voting membership is the appropriate instrument.
I believe effective oversight depends on having the appropriate high level information and having the opportunity to timely inject information that is needed to steer an outcome. An alternative method for sharing and injecting is having regular meetings between the I* chairs and the ISOC President/CEO. I believe that such meetings are much more effective for the parties involved than being exposed to all details.
This only an illustration of an instrument, there may be other instruments for oversight as well. But I do not think the ex-officio membership is the only method.
--Olaf
________________________________________________________
Olaf M. Kolkman NLnet Labs
Science Park 140,
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/ 1098 XG Amsterdam
<<attachment: smime.p7s>>
Attachment:
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf