Dear colleagues, I am an employee (CEO) of the Internet Society and I am emphatically not speaking for it. As a matter of full disclosure, however, the Internet Society also issued a statement in respect of the situation in Hong Kong, in consultation with the ISOC chapter in Hong Kong. I was both a member and chair of the IAB for a period of time. During that time, the much-ballyhooed "IANA transition" happened. I had plenty of occasions to speak about various things going on during that time, and I quite often used my affiliation with the IAB under such circumstances. It is with that background in mind that I send this note. On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 02:42:04PM +0800, Barry Leiba wrote: > 1. By being signed by four IAB members who are identified primarily as > IAB members, the letter *appears* to be from the IAB. I have passed > this by three non-IETF friends, asking them who they think the letter > is from, and all three said, “The Internet Architecture Board.” I am entirely unwilling to speculate about worldwide interpretation trends of texts based on the sample, "Three friends of Barry Leiba under uncontrolled questioning." Please don't stand on that kind of sample as anything other than the worst kind of anecdata. > 2. By using “Member, Internet Architecture Board” this way, those > signing the letter are effectively (whether by intent or not) using > their IAB positions to gain credibility for their personal opinions. Or else they are presenting evidence that a community that the audiece might otherwise respect decided that these were people who had a thing or two to say about how the Internet works. That seems to me important because … > I think this is wildly inappropriate. … I think it is wildly appropriate. The _very point_ of the IAB is that it is not subject to consensus rules that the IETF is. I think it would indeed be inappropriate for people to use their affiliation with the IESG this way: the IESG _does_ speak for the IETF. But the IAB does not, and that not-speaking-for role is in fact part of the _point_ of having the IAB at all. If IAB members cannot tell people, "I have this view and, by the way, my community appointed me to this August Body precisely so that I would have views and say them," then I am mystified what we want the IAB for except simple constitutional duties. If the IAB exists to be the Governor General[1] of the IETF, then we should change its charter. But I don't think that's the IAB job today, and I think its members need to be able to be clear under what title they have an opinion. Best regards, A [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_General_of_Canada -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
