Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.2.20050131203535.054bd550@mail.jefsey.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2005 01:20:27 +0100
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <tslvf9e8xbm.fsf@cz.mit.edu>
References: <6.1.2.0.2.20050129115602.0378ccd0@mail.utel.net>
	<tslvf9e8xbm.fsf@cz.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-9777429;
	boundary="=======AVGMAIL-41FECC507CCF======="
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: some pending IASA issues
Precedence: list
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

--=======AVGMAIL-41FECC507CCF=======
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="=====================_47345949==.ALT";
	x-avg-checked=avg-ok-9777429

--=====================_47345949==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed;
	x-avg-checked=avg-ok-9777429

At 21:40 30/01/2005, Sam Hartman wrote:

> >>>>> "JFC" == JFC (Jefsey) Morfin <jefsey@jefsey.com> writes:
>
>     JFC> 2. ISOC is an international organization, yet there is no
>     JFC> indication about relations with ISOC local chapters. For
>     JFC> organizing local IETF lists, assisting with IETF meetings,
>     JFC> documenting specific local issues when requested, encouraging
>     JFC> regional workshops, meetings, shows, publications. This
>     JFC> should be noted in a short paragraph to acknowledge
>     JFC> national/regional contributions and support and to leave open
>     JFC> any further suggestion/development. Cost: 3lines to be added.
>
>I agree it is appropriate for ISOC to discuss local chapters.
>
>How do you see this impacting the IASA BCP?  Can you give an example
>of what sort of change you are talking about?  Proposed text and an
>indication of where it should go in the document would be best.

The target is not to modify the Internet process but to anchor it in its 
international context and to promote local contributions. There is a coming 
IETF meeting in Paris. The French ISOC chapter was not informed, we have no 
local contact. The discussion about the weather in Paris, would have been a 
good occasion to prepare more ties. There are specific needs that come from 
different situations and different cultures, as the current Pacific Debate 
on Governance shows it. These needs need to be documented and addressed.

Also, ISOC chapter could help some local PRs. IETF is a complex/heavy 
process to follow for individuals. Helping local teams to gather can only 
help research and proposition seeds to be introduced by independent/small 
companies and schools. This is certainly something ISOC Chapters can help.

I think we could add in part 7 after "Independence":


    International: ISOC shall work with its local Chapters, the IAD and IAOC to
       document how the IETF meetings and Internet standard process could take
       advantage from the ISOC international presence and market knowledge.

>    JFC> 3. Regional representation. Most of the Internet
>     JFC> organizations make sure their BoD is regionally
>     JFC> distributed. This is not appropriate for a technical entity,
>     JFC> however IAOC is an administrative body. I would suggest the
>     JFC> Draft Section 4 to include a recommendation (not an
>     JFC> obligation) that all the main parts of the world are
>     JFC> represented at the IAOC. Cost: 2 lines to be added.
>
>I agree that regional location is an important factor to consider when
>selecting IAOC members.

Yes. But, it should only be mentionned as a recommendation. So there is no 
embarrassing obligation. As for suggested ISOC Chapters and 
multilingualism, the target is to open the way to further work on the issue.

jfc



--=====================_47345949==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-9777429

<html>
<body>
At 21:40 30/01/2005, Sam Hartman wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;
&quot;JFC&quot; == JFC (Jefsey) Morfin &lt;jefsey@jefsey.com&gt;
writes:<br><br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; 2. ISOC is an international organization, yet
there is no<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; indication about relations with ISOC local
chapters. For<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; organizing local IETF lists, assisting with
IETF meetings,<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; documenting specific local issues when
requested, encouraging<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; regional workshops, meetings, shows,
publications. This<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; should be noted in a short paragraph to
acknowledge<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; national/regional contributions and support
and to leave open<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; any further suggestion/development. Cost:
3lines to be added.<br><br>
I agree it is appropriate for ISOC to discuss local chapters.<br><br>
How do you see this impacting the IASA BCP?&nbsp; Can you give an
example<br>
of what sort of change you are talking about?&nbsp; Proposed text and
an<br>
indication of where it should go in the document would be
best.</blockquote><br>
The target is not to modify the Internet process but to anchor it in its
international context and to promote local contributions. There is a
coming IETF meeting in Paris. The French ISOC chapter was not informed,
we have no local contact. The discussion about the weather in Paris,
would have been a good occasion to prepare more ties. There are specific
needs that come from different situations and different cultures, as the
current Pacific Debate on Governance shows it. These needs need to be
documented and addressed. <br><br>
Also, ISOC chapter could help some local PRs. IETF is a complex/heavy
process to follow for individuals. Helping local teams to gather can only
help research and proposition seeds to be introduced by independent/small
companies and schools. This is certainly something ISOC Chapters can
help.<br><br>
I think we could add in part 7 after &quot;Independence&quot;:<br><br>
<br>
<pre>&nbsp;&nbsp; International: ISOC shall work with its local Chapters,
the IAD and IAOC to
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; document how the IETF meetings and
Internet standard process could take 
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; advantage from the ISOC international
presence and market knowledge.

</pre><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">&nbsp;&nbsp;  JFC&gt; 3.
Regional representation. Most of the Internet<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; organizations make sure their BoD is
regionally<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; distributed. This is not appropriate for a
technical entity,<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; however IAOC is an administrative body. I
would suggest the<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; Draft Section 4 to include a recommendation
(not an<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; obligation) that all the main parts of the
world are<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; JFC&gt; represented at the IAOC. Cost: 2 lines to be
added.<br><br>
I agree that regional location is an important factor to consider
when<br>
selecting IAOC members.</blockquote><br>
Yes. But, it should only be mentionned as a recommendation. So there is
no embarrassing obligation. As for suggested ISOC Chapters and
multilingualism, the target is to open the way to further work on the
issue. <br><br>
jfc<br><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--=====================_47345949==.ALT--
--=======AVGMAIL-41FECC507CCF=======
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

--=======AVGMAIL-41FECC507CCF=======--