Subject: A question regarding IETF appointments

From: Leslie Daigle <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 14:51:03 -0400

Annually, the IAB makes an appointment to one of three seats on the
Internet Society Board of Trustees (ISOC BoT). BCP 77 (RFC 3677), which
describes the selection process, allows IESG and IAB members to be
selected for the ISOC Board, though no more than two of the three could
be IESG or IAB members. In addition, BCP 10 (RFC 3777) in no way limits
the NomCom from selecting sitting ISOC Board members to be on the IAB or
IESG.

There is a new relationship between ISOC and the IETF for administrative
support as defined by BCP 101 (RFC 4071). Given these changes in our
ties to ISOC, the IAB has been discussing (without coming to any
conclusion on the matter) whether it is any longer appropriate for
someone to simultaneously hold both an IAB/IESG position and a seat on
the ISOC BoT. We think the community should discuss this.

Note that if such a restriction is necessary, both BCP 77 and BCP 10
would need to be updated to reflect that.

You are alway welcome to send comments privately to the IAB, but for
the purposes of community *discussion*, please use this list
([email-masked]).

Leslie,
for the IAB.

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

---

From: Thomas Narten <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 13:13:11 -0400

> the ISOC BoT. We think the community should discuss this.

I think that there can certainly be times when the role of an I*
member conflicts with the role of an ISOC BoT member. But it depends a
lot on the particular issue at hand, and there are certainly ways of
dealing with them on a case-by-case basis. E.g., recusal, being very
clear about which hat one is speaking from when making comments,
etc. And in the vast majority issues, it's unclear to me that there
are so many inherent conflict of interest situation that one is lead
to the conclusion that dual appointments should never happen.

So, I don't think that the potential for conflicts should be cause for
an absolute prohibition on such dual appointments.

In the case of the IAB making an ISOC BoT selection/recommendation, I
would hope that (should they) seriously consider appointing someone
who is already an I* member, they would take into consideration such
factors as "doing too much already", would they be able to deal with
conflicts in an appropriate fashion, etc. Likewise, I would
hope/expect that the nomcom would do the same when considering a
nomination for an I* position for a sitting ISOC BoT member.

But at the end of the day, if the IAB (nomcom) concludes that the best
person for the job is indeed a current I* (ISOC BoT) member, I think
we'd be better served by allowing them to exercise good judgement
(i.e, do what they are supposed to do).

Thomas