This mailing list is no longer active and has been transitioned to discuss@1net.org. Members of the I-coordination mailing list have been moved to the new mailing list. To learn more, visit 1net.org.

[I-coordination] What is 1net to me?

John Curran jcurran at arin.net
Wed Dec 4 22:09:54 CET 2013


On Dec 5, 2013, at 4:18 AM, Andrew Sullivan <ajs at anvilwalrusden.com> wrote:

> It would be quite another matter for either Jari or Russ to claim to
> be leaders of the Technical Community.  I'd be gobsmacked if either of
> them tried without a great deal of care and qualification.  Moreover,
> the IETF has a very clear mechanism by which it can ask someone to
> represent its views.  That mechanism is the IETF consensus call.  The
> IETF and IAB Chairs of course act as leaders, but in general the IETF
> doesn't elect people to speak for it.  (In this respect, the IETF and
> IAB Chairs are not like CEOs.  They don't have quite the same
> organizational backing.)
> 
> Treading on these traditions is likely to cause a backlash in the
> relevant community (in this case, the IETF).  I think it's important
> either to be super careful about all this (in which case, we need to
> move slowly), or else to be fast-and-loose about all this
> organizational detail until some more concrete plans can be discussed.
> What I think will _not_ work is to be fast and careless but to pretend
> to be careful.  That will inevitably lead to backlash.  Anyone who
> followed any of the discussion about this effort over on the IETF list
> will understand what I mean, I think.

Andrew - 
 
 I agree with the above, but wish to add another dynamic for consideration.

 At this time, we actually don't know to the extent that a steering committee
 member will be asked to represent the view of any particular body.  Decisions 
 about web site updates, manner of remote participation, and tools for 1net
 collaboration are not necessarily matters of organizational representation, 
 whereas selection of topics to be considered, choosing representatives for 
 various meeting organizing committees, and the mechanisms for approving an
 outcome from 1net are likely to be matters that some communities want more
 formal discussion back into their constituent organizations and the result
 taken into consideration during the decision process.

 Given the fledgling state of 1net, and the fact that the modes of operation
 for the steering committee are still to be determined, I believe that it is
 necessary to proceed expeditiously with recognition that as the collective
 1net steering committee formalizes the modes of operation, it may be desirable
 to revisit the various representatives.  I believe this is also a reason for
 considering interim appointments in some cases; in that it enables forward
 progress whilst allowing revisiting the situation as more info is available.

/John

Disclaimer: My views alone.






More information about the I-coordination mailing list