IETF Administrative Support Activity 2.0: Update to the Process for Selection of Trustees for the IETF Trust
draft-ietf-iasa2-trust-rationale-03

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-iasa2-trust-rationale@ietf.org, jon.peterson@neustar.biz, iasa20@ietf.org, alissa@cooperw.in, Jon Peterson <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>, iasa2-chairs@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Document Action: 'Discussion of the IASA 2.0 Changes as They Relate to the IETF Trust' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-iasa2-trust-rationale-03.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Discussion of the IASA 2.0 Changes as They Relate to the IETF Trust'
  (draft-ietf-iasa2-trust-rationale-03.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the IETF Administrative Support Activity 2
Working Group.

The IESG contact person is Alissa Cooper.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-iasa2-trust-rationale/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

The IASA 2.0 changes will have an impact on the IETF Trust because
   members of the IET Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) IAOC,
   which is being phased out, have served as Trustees of the IETF Trust.
   This discussion document provides background on the current IETF
   Trust arrangements, explains the effect of the rules in the founding
   documents during a transition to a new arrangement, and provides a
   rationale for the update.

Working group summary

This document was reviewed reviewed by the IASA2.0 WG. There was some discussion during WGLC of whether this document should advance to Information RFC or simply be allowed to expire. The group expressed a slight preference for advancing the document, as it is referenced by draft-ietf-iana2-trust-update.

There were a few review comments from the WG that should be implemented before this document becomes an RFC. It is anticipated that those changes will be wrapped into the document with any last call comments. For example, the last sentence of Section 1 now states that this document was not targeting RFC status, which it clearly now is.   

Document Quality

There are no concerns about document quality.

Personnel

Jon Peterson is the document shepherd. Alissa Cooper is the responsible area director.

RFC Editor Note