[CCWG-ACCT] [IAB] Please review regarding IAB comments on Mission Statement

[Andrew Sullivan]

On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 06:23:13AM +0100, Kavouss Arasteh wrote:
> Wouildn't be more prudent to keep the texct as iot was and when ever ,we
> refer to coorinationin the text we complemented it b" and support ,where
> applicable and required"
> The rest unchanged$

If the plan is to "keep the text as it was," that would mean making no
changes whatsoever to the mission statement and also not changing its
effective role, right?  That is, the mission text could not change
compared to what is in the bylaws today, it could not become a
fundamental bylaw, and it could not become the basic ground on which
all appeal reasoning is built.

Is that what you propose?  If so, then (not having polled the IAB so
speaking just for myself) I suspect the approach might be something I
could live with.  We'd revert to the situation we've had for many
years: the mission statement is fancifully over-broad, but because
it's only a statement of corporate aspiration it's merely annoying
rather than a threat to the IETF.  At the same time, this approach
seems to be a pretty big departure from what's been in the CCWG drafts
so far, which have both founded the IRP on the mission.  So it would
solve this mission-text problem by creating at least as large a
problem elsewhere in the CCWG's work.

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs at anvilwalrusden.com