Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-wasserman-iasa-bcp-01.txt

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 18:26:37 +0100

I'm in general OK with this draft, but I have a few non-editorial
comments:

 > 1.  Introduction
...
>     RFC Editor and IANA.  The IASA is also responsible for the financial
>     activities associated with IETF administrative support such as
>     collecting IETF meeting fees, paying invoices, managing budgets and
>     financial accounts, etc.

I suggest this should read "The IASA is also ultimately responsible..."
because actual collection and payments may of course be outsourced.

...
>     The IASA is distinct from other IETF-related technical functions,
>     such as the RFC Editor, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
>     (IANA), and the IETF standards process itself.  The IASA has no
>     influence on the technical decisions of the IETF or on the technical
>     contents of IETF work.

Suggest adding:

    This in no way prevents people who form part of the IASA participating
    as individuals in IETF activities.

 > 2.1  IAD Responsibilities
...
>     Although the approval of the ISOC President/CEO or ISOC Board of
>     Trustees may be required for some contracts, their review should be
>     limited to protecting ISOC's liabilities and financial stability.

I think this needs to be preceded by something like:

    Formally, ISOC will be legally responsible for IASA's contracts, and will
    delegate appropriate signature rights to the IAD. Contracts and payments
    above a certain amount may require additional signatures as a matter of
    good financial practice by ISOC.

...
>     Unless explicitly delegated with the consent of the IAOC, the IAD
>     will also fill the role of the IETF Executive Director, as described
>     in various IETF process BCPs.

I don't have any suggestions for change to this, but I think that
with experience it may be better to change the process BCPs.
For example, it doesn't seeem likely that the IAD will prepare the
IESG agendas; that should be part of the clerical function.

 > 3.  IAOC Membership, Selection and Accountability
...
>     [Note: There is some question about whether the IAB Chair should be a
>     liaison or a full member of the IAOC.  There are multiple trade-offs
>     here, and this should be discussed by the community.]

I believe this should be a voting seat, since it is stated just below
that the IAB-appointed member probably won't be a member of the IAB.

>     The members of the IAOC will typically serve two year terms.  IAOC
>     terms will normally end at the first IETF meeting of a year, similar
>     to IAB and IESG terms.

I don't see why it's "typically". It seems to me we should stipulate two year
terms, except for the initial transitional period.

...
>     The two NomCom selected members will be selected using the procedures
>     described in RFC 3777 [RFC3777].  For the initial IAOC selection, the
>     IESG will provide the list of desired qualifications for these
>     positions.  In later years, this list will be provided by the IAOC.
>     The IESG will serve as the confirming body for IAOC appointments.

Presumably the last sentence only applies to the NomCom-selected members?
If you mean it to apply to the IAB- and ISOC-selected members, that seems
odd, and it can't possibly apply to the IESG-selected member.

> 4.  IASA Funding
> 
>     The IASA is supported financially in 3 ways:

Presumably this is apart from any initial transitional arrangements.

...
>     3.  Other ISOC support.  ISOC will deposit in the IASA account, each
>         quarter, other funds that ISOC has committed to providing as part
>         of the IASA budget (where the meeting revenues and specific
>         donations do not cover the budget).

I would make it "at least each quarter."

Also, I would add something like:

    If ISOC directly funds any other IETF expenses, such as the IETF
    share of ISOC's liability insurance premium, this will be documented
    together with the other IASA accounts.

 > 5.  IASA Budget Process
...
>     The dates described above are subject to change, and will most likely
>     be modified based on the dates of the summer and fall IETF meetings.

I think we generally say the Second and Third IETF meetings, for our colleagues
in the Southern Hemisphere.

Finally, do we need a paragraph to allow for the IETF Chair's small
discretionary budget? I don't recall that it's mentioned in draft-malamud.

    Brian

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf