Re: ISOC chapter and board compositon

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 11/25/17 12:55 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

On 26/11/2017 06:26, Miles Fidelman wrote:
...
Regarding 2:  When votes only go to organizational members, and
"Platinum Members," with a weighted vote, include Comcast and
NBCUniversal,
To be clear, the weighted voting applies only to the election of
the four Board members from the organizational members, i.e. at
most to one third of the Board. I don't see this as unduly susceptible
to vested interests.

one gets a bit leery of ISOCs ability to give unbiased
advise on things like Network Neutrality (excuse me, Common Carriage and
Anti-Trust, to use regulatory language that has more of a clearly
understood history & grounding).  One might also question the influence
of groups like ICANN and ARIN, when IETF has a contractual relationship
with them and sets standards to be implemented & managed (and enforced?)
by them.  It's all just a bit to rife with conflict of interest.
Exactly why the Board is set up with the checks and balances of having
three separate constituencies. Do you have any evidence that actual
conflicts have arisen without being declared? (The Board members have to
sign a conflict of interest declaration, of course.)

No.  But the appearance of one is a concern.  Given the current "membership" structure (and membership), it is not at all clear who ISOC represents or speaks for when commenting on policy matters. Certainly it is not speaking for me, as an individual member, or as a member of the "Internet community."  When IEEE-USA, or US-ACM comments on policy, or advocate - the entire process is very transparent, as are how members sit on policy boards (been there, done that), and form policy statements.  Not so, when it comes to ISOC.

Now, personally, I'd be perfectly happy for ISOC to have a sole mission of providing an organizational home for IETF, and weighing in only on policy issues that specifically relate to IETF's role in Internet Governance.  We would still need a governance structure that ensures proper stewardship of the IETF.  There would still need to be some governance & transparency for a process by which IETF weighs in on policy matters - though that kind of worked pretty well when we were going through the whole bit about changes to the ICANN contract.

Miles

--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra




[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]