[KI-LC] Subscribers - Operating Procedures Update - related to ByLaws
colin_wallis at hotmail.com
Wed May 9 17:13:49 EDT 2012
All good points Heather, and well answered Joni.As one of your two LC reps on the BoT I don't have much to add except that the definition of these member classes in the by-laws would be darn useful - good catch Heather.Is there a better term than 'subscriber' to describe this class of member that contribute services I wonder... the BoT got pretty used to it since we have been discussing it since the Redwood City F2F last October.Any suggestions LC?CheersColin From: joni at ieee-isto.org
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 13:00:14 -0700
To: hlflanagan at internet2.edu
CC: LC at kantarainitiative.org
Subject: Re: [KI-LC] Subscribers - Operating Procedures Update - related to ByLaws
see in line and thanks!
On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Heather Flanagan <hlflanagan at internet2.edu> wrote:
I have several questions about KI's ByLaws and Operating Procedures, and I'm afraid some of them might be appallingly ignorant questions. But They do tie in to the question below regarding the new Subscriber class.
There appears to be more than one level of membership class, at least that's my guess when looking at the Kantara Initiative Membership Information form (http://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/download/attachments/2293776/Kantara+Initiative+Membership+Info+Form.pdf). There is a CSP Subscriber, an AA Subscriber, plus a Trustee and a Member.
So my questions are:
1) Is the new Subscriber class something different than the CSP or AA Subscriber?
There may be for say technical interoperability only. But we don't have those tools yet so perhaps some verbage around this class being dedicated at a particular type of user - typically providing a service, assessment or an org seeking interoperability tools and testing support.
2) If so, should we be defining those classes in the By-Laws and Operating Agreement also (I am not seeing them there - maybe that's just me being blind)?
The by-laws really captured only the top top level concept. I have to check with Dervla if it's not in the Membership agreement yet. Perhaps it needs a special subscriber agreement which is not the member agreement. But yes it must be captured in the Operating Procedures now and then filter in to the other agreements and potentially back up to the by-laws.
3) on the Info form, it says that the two Subscriber classes are non-voting members. If that's correct, I would think that should be made explicit in the by-laws, no?
Good point. with LC review I can take that back to the board. We're looking for concepts. One idea floated was that for profile and criteria development stakeholders must be at least subscribers (== not non-funding participants)
For the voting I believe it was envisioned that Subscribers would vote only at the WG level and not in all-member votes. So that concept must be vetted and captured in the OPs.
Sorry so short but I have to hope on a meeting now (which unfortunately conflicts with LC).
Let's catch up by phone.. maybe Friday if you are available.
thanks as always Heather!
Heather (working on her AI from last LC call)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joni Brennan" <joni at ieee-isto.org>
To: LC at kantarainitiative.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2012 6:20:27 PM
Subject: [KI-LC] Subscribers - Operating Procedures Update - related to ByLaws
As discussed the BoT approved a motion to add a new class of involvement for Kantara Initiative which is Subscriber (see Definition below )
The Subscriber class was created with a few drivers in mind. One was to consolidate the Assurance Accreditation and Approval fees to an easier and more logical scheme. Another reason was to get this class of membership ready for access to interoperability specific tools. We have a project moving with Geant around the creation of OpenID Connect deployment verification tool which we're seeking to package for a certification in 2013. The idea is that these Subscribers are really geared at certification and approval activities.
The challenge: LC to discuss further this class of participation and determine rules to accompany it for incorporation in to the operating procedures. The next step is to have input and discussion in the LC toward draft text that would ultimately go for a full membership vote. (The operating procedure management is under the role of the LC and the full membership votes on final proposed changes.)
I'm requesting this item to be added to the next LC agenda and email discussion / thoughts in advance are more than welcome!
1.19 “Subscriber” means any entity that has completed the necessary application forms, satisfied the objective subscriber criteria for the Organization, executed a copy of the Member Agreement (with Subscriber selected), and paid the appropriate Subscriber Fee as established by the Board of Trustees. A Subscriber may be an individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust, limited liability company, business association, governmental entity or other entity. Subscribers are typically those entities that are Certification and Assurance Programs stakeholders.
A Subscriber is any entity that has completed the necessary application forms, satisfied the objective subscriber criteria for the Organization, executed a copy of the Member Agreement (with Subscriber selected), and paid the appropriate Subscriber Fee as established by the Board of Trustees. A Subscriber may be an individual, corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust, limited liability company, business association, governmental entity or other entity. Subscribers are typically those entities that are Certification and Assurance Programs stakeholders.
Kantara Initiative | Executive Director
email: joni @ ieee-isto.org
YouTube: Kantara Initiative - The Bridge to Assurance Communities
LC mailing list
LC at kantarainitiative.org
LC mailing list
LC at kantarainitiative.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the LC