|
Scott, We are going to disagree on this, I'm afraid. On 2/6/16 10:17 PM, Scott O. Bradner
wrote:
from this IAOC member’s point of view - maybe distorted by the specific issues the IAOC has been dealing with of lateOn Feb 6, 2016, at 3:47 PM, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: WRT the incomplete argument I'd ask the current (and past members) of the IAOC to comment on the following questions (to paraphrase Leslie's note quite a bit): Are there specific benefits to the IAOC to having the IAB chair continue as a member of the IAOC that would not be met if he/she were replaced by another member of the IAB?yes, a major (but not majority) topic in the last year has been about internet governance and what impacts the changes in IANA management might have on the IETF and on the IETF Trust - it seems that, at least for the last two IAB chairs, the IAB chair has been the IAB point person on these topics and the chair’s direct knowledge of what has been going on has been quite helpful Maybe (and I stress maybe) to the IAOC- not to the IAB nor to the chair. And this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the chair is required to sit on the IAOC the concentration of responsibility by definition makes him the go to person for a LOT of things, and not just IANA. Moreover, it's not like the IAOC is barred from inviting anyone to talk with them at their meetings. having the IAB chair on the IAOC might not make much difference in other topics, such as the specifics of the RFC editor task set, or meeting locations, if another IAB member with knowledge of the topics were to replace the chair And this is the point: on any given topic someone else might be more expert. Take for instance the RFC series. There are two people who are probably better equipped to speak on that matter right now than the chair himself (no offense to Andrew). Joe Hildebrand oversees the RSOC program. The IAOC would be foolish not to speak to him about the RFC Editor in terms of their responsibilities in that regard. there is a image factor - that the IAB considers the IAOC important enough to ensure that the IAOC role is part of the chair’s task set projects a somewhat different image than having another IAB member - not a huge issue but a factor Would it help the image of the IAOC if they ended up in a situation where they had an absentee chair because his time didn't permit him to participate in the IAOC in any active way? I'm not saying that happened while I was on the IAB, but it could and my understanding is that it HAS happened on the IAOC with other groups. At that point, short of replacing the chair, neither the IAB nor the IAOC would be in a position to correct the situation. And the IAB is not likely to replace a chair for such reasons (a) due to inertia and (b) taking into account what that person's priorities were on behalf of the board. Finally there is the matter of good governance. Bodies should be allowed to choose for themselves who they have represent them at other bodies. That provides them the flexibility to take advantage of the time and skills of each individual who is serving. That, by the way, makes the chair job more attractive. Otherwise the time commitment requirements become a serious concern. Eliot |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature