Patrik, I fear that I need to side with Dave on this (!). For issues at the technology-policy boundary, ISOC is seen in the outside community as the representative and "voice" of the IETF. That is generally a good thing and it is an impression many of us have worked for years to create. However, its side-effect is that, if ISOC ventures into a management/policy role with one particular consortium, the same folks we have been trying to persuade that ISOC should be seen as the lead policy body in the Internet technical community --in large measure because it does represent the IETF-- are likely to infer (and reasonably so) IETF endorsement of that consortium and its efforts.
That ultimately has little or nothing to do with whether the IETF has active work in the area or how that work is organized. It is the presumption that the IETF is taking/endorsing a set of positions via ISOC. Like Dave, I don't see looking for IETF community consensus on the details is either necessary or desirable. At the same time, I think the IETF should be aware of the decisions being made and the actions being taken early enough that interested community members can make comments that are considered in the ISOC mix and decision process. If this has been discussed in depth with the IAB and the IAB chose to not engage the community in advance of the press releases, then, IMO, the IAB has fallen down on its job. Independent of the IAB, while IETF-appointed ISOC BoT members represent themselves and not the IETF, I believe that you (collectively) have at least a moral obligation to notice issues on which the IETF community should be informed and to make sure that happens... an obligation that goes well beyond "well, you could have come to the meetings or read the minutes". Certainly I know that the IETF has, as a body, tended to pay fairly little attention to ISOC actions and activities. But that may be a reason for more, rather than less, outreach. I am not suggesting trying to undo this decision, but believe that, as ISOC adds sufficient technically-qualified staff to engage in activities like this on its own, we need to work, collectively, on better ways to facilitate communication in a timely basis in the future. In particular, we need to work fairly hard to avoid a situation in which the IETF and ISOC end up with different positions on an issue with external visibility and consequences. To do so would damage the credibility of all concerned. best, john _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf