Hi Ted,
At 02:08 PM 24-09-2018, Ted Hardie wrote:
Thanks for the review. The issue here is that RFC 4071 and RFC 4371
will be obsolete at the end of the IASA 2.0 process, and the aim is
to make the process listed here complete without needing to read the
previous iterations of BCP 101. If the document didn't reference
the previous document at all, do you think it is clear how the
Trustees are selected?
Thanks for the prompt reply. One of the points which I missed in my
previous comment was that the draft obsoletes RFC 4371. The draft
updates instead of obsoleting RFC 4071 by removing a sentence which
RFC 4371 added to Section 3.2 of RFC 4071.
The appointments as specified in Section 2 are clear.
I don't think so, as it is the "why", where this document is
intended to be narrowly scoped to how. An informative reference
makes sense, and it has already been suggested.
It might be useful to publish the "why" if the RFCs are viewed as
part of an archival series.
This document doesn't update BCP 10, so I believe your change has to
be directed there, not at this document.
The WG charter states that existing IETF and IAB appointments are out
of scope. As the draft specifies new appointments, I presume that
matters related to appointments are included as part of this Last
Call. The IETF rules regarding recalls are specified in this draft
by reference. Is it fair that IETF rules with respect to the recall
of IETF Trustees be unavailable to roughly one third of the
IETF? That is the question which the IESG may have to give some thought to.
As a comment about BCP 10, a side effect of removing
the re
quirement that trustees be drawn from the members of the IAOC is that
BCP 10 would no longer be applicable given that the document does not
say anything about IETF trustees. That also removes an ineligibility
requirement which is currently applicable to an IETF trustee given
that the that "IETF rules" are ambiguous.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
