Ballot for draft-bradner-iaoc-terms
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 01 and is now closed.
This is a fine document, even if the need for it makes me discouraged about our ability to get any process right the first time :-) I would support text changes to accommodate Stephen's #2 and #3 comments.
wfm
Three nits, could be worth fixing though: 1. Is "Updates: 4071" correct in the header? I'd have expected "Updates: BCP 101" or nothing (and that this be added to BCP101). 2. Section 2 says: "the sentence defining when IOAC member terms" that seems possibly quite loosely written - quoting the precise text to be removed would be better and not hard. (If that were hard, then this point should be a discuss I guess;-) 3. Section 2 also says "relative to the above mentioned IAOC meeting" - that's ambiguous and could be interpreted as meaning that it is ok for the IAOC to decide that terms will start 11 months after that meeting. (At least if there's no other text somewhere else that'd prevent that.) Again, that seems loose and easily improved, just add a sentence saying "IAOC member terms MUST start/end close to the time of the 1st IETF meeting."