On 2011-09-19 20:05, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
<snip>
>> Also, the new section 2.3, which is incorrectly titled but presumably
>> is intended to be "IETF Trust membership" seems to me to be inconsistent
>> with the Trust Agreement. The Trust Agreement states that the Eligible
>> Persons
>> (to become Trustees) are each "a then-current member of the IAOC, duly
>> appointed
>> and in good standing in accordance with the procedures of the IAOC
>> established
>> pursuant to IETF document BCP 101 [as amended]". That doesn't exclude the
>> non-voting members of the IAOC, which is why the IAD is already a Trustee.
>> To change this, the Trust would have to change the Trust Agreement. To be
>> clear,
>> I'm not saying this can't be done, but it can't be ignored either.
>
>
>
> Yes, it is incorrectly titled.
>
> As far as I understand the trust agreement the voting members and the IAD are
> members of the trust. If the 'chairs' are non-voting members of the IAOC then
> the idea is that they would not be trustees and a modification of the trust
> agreement is not needed. That can be clarified.
>
> If the chairs should be trustees (are you arguing that?) then I agree, a
> trust agreement modification is needed.
The Trust Agreement and *only* the Trust Agreement defines who
is a Trustee. At the moment it says that members of the IAOC
under BCP 101 are Trustees, without any qualification such as
"voting". So if we make the I* Chairs non-voting members of
the IAOC by formally updating BCP 101, the I* Chairs would
remain as Trustees. Since that is (in my experience) a large
part of an IAOC member's time commitment, the problem you're
trying to solve would not be solved, IMHO, unless the Trust
amended the Trust Agreement too. That's all I wanted to point out.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
