IAB, IESG, and IAOC Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: IAOC Advisor for the Nominating Committee
draft-dawkins-iesg-nomcom-advisor-iaoc-01

IESG                                                          S. Dawkins
Internet-Draft                                            Wonder Hamster
Updates: 7437 (if approved)                               August 8, 2017
Intended status: Best Current Practice
Expires: February 9, 2018

 IAB, IESG, and IAOC Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: IAOC
                  Advisor for the Nominating Committee
             draft-dawkins-iesg-nomcom-advisor-iaoc-01.txt

Abstract

   This specification formalizes an ad hoc practice used to provide
   advice to the IETF Nominating Committee about the operations of the
   IETF Administrative Oversight Committee.

   This document updates RFC 7437.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 9, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft           IAOC Advisor for Nomcom             August 2017

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Discussion Venue  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Background on IAOC Liaisons to Nominating Committees  . . . .   3
   4.  Issues with IAOC Naming a Liaison . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Why an Advisor? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  BCP Text Changes  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     6.1.  Change to Section 4.3, 'Structure'  . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   10. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7

1.  Introduction

   This specification formalizes an ad hoc practice used to provide
   advice to the IETF Nominating Committee about the operations of the
   IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) (described in
   [RFC4071]).

   This document updates [RFC7437].

   Note: In https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/
         msg00518.html, Brian Carpenter asked the reasonable question -
         why is the justification about six times as long as the actual
         changed BCP text?  Spencer's answer was that this ad hoc role
         has been called a "liaison" since at least 2010, but in
         conferring with the current IAOC, what the IAOC intends to send
         is better described as an "advisor", so it seemed reasonable to
         explain why this proposal goes in a new direction.

         Spencer is, of course, interested in hearing from other people
         about that.

2.  Discussion Venue

   Please direct questions and comments to the IETF-Nomcom mailing list,
   at https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nomcom.  The
   subscribers to the IETF Discussion mailing list will likely be
   grateful for that.

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft           IAOC Advisor for Nomcom             August 2017

3.  Background on IAOC Liaisons to Nominating Committees

   When RFC 7437 [RFC7437] was approved, it explicitly charged the
   Nominating Committee with selecting and reviewing certain members of
   the IAOC.  However, [RFC7437] did not provide for the IAOC to send a
   liaison to the Nominating Committee.

   This was not thought to be an obstacle, because [RFC7437] allowed any
   committee member to propose a liaison from the IAOC:

      Any committee member may propose the addition of a liaison from
      other unrepresented organizations to participate in some or all of
      the deliberations of the committee.  The addition must be approved
      by the committee according to its established voting mechanism.
      Liaisons participate as representatives of their respective
      organizations.

   Beginning in 2010, the IAOC provided a liaison to each Nominating
   Committee.  In 2016, the IAOC did not provide a liaison because the
   Nominating Committee was not appointing an IAOC member.  The previous
   Nominating Committee had filled a mid-term vacancy, using the process
   described in Section 3.5. of [RFC7437], appointing an IAOC member for
   term longer than two years.  In 2017, the NomCom selected an IAOC
   member, but the opportunity to request a liaison from the IAOC was
   overlooked, because because this practice wasn't part of the
   documented process.  [RFC7437].

   This specification adds the previously ad hoc role to [RFC7437], so
   future Nominating Committees will be less likely to overlook it.

4.  Issues with IAOC Naming a Liaison

   Discussions about this topic led to the recognition that "Liaison"
   was not the best description of this role.

   The role of Liaison defined in [RFC7437], Section 4.7 places some
   significant obligations on Liaisons that aren't necessary for
   Nominating Committee to ask questions and get answers about the IAOC
   that come up in deliberations.  These obligations include

   o  Liaisons are responsible for ensuring the nominating committee in
      general and the Chair in particular execute their assigned duties
      in the best interests of the IETF community.

   o  Liaisons from the IESG, IAB, and Internet Society Board of
      Trustees (if one was appointed) are expected to review the
      operation and executing process of the nominating committee and to
      report any concerns or issues to the Chair of the nominating

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft           IAOC Advisor for Nomcom             August 2017

      committee immediately.  If they can not resolve the issue between
      themselves, liaisons must report it according to the dispute
      resolution process stated elsewhere in this document.

   o  Liaisons may have other nominating committee responsibilities as
      required by their respective organizations or requested by the
      nominating committee, except that such responsibilities may not
      conflict with any other provisions of this document.

   [RFC7437], Section 4.8 requires the IESG and IAB liaisons to be
   sitting members of the organization they represent.  Because so many
   IAOC positions are filled by members who are already members of IETF
   leadership who are subject to review by the Nominating Committee,
   limiting an IAOC Liaison to one of the sitting members would mean
   that in some years, only the person who was appointed by the previous
   Nominating Committee and not being reviewed by this Nominating
   Committee, and the person who was appointed by the IAB or IESG and
   not being reviewed by the IAB/IESG, would be eligible sitting members
   of the IAOC who could serve as a Liaison for the Nominating
   Committee.

   Although past IAOC Liaisions to the Nominating Committee have all
   been sitting members of the IAOC, after 10 years of IAOC operation,
   it is thought that other members of the community have sufficent
   experience to provide guidance if the IAOC chooses to provide such a
   person.

   Finally, in [RFC7437],Section 4.6, all of the liaisons are included
   in the pool of people who are eligible to be selected as a
   replacement for a Chair.

      There are a variety of ordinary circumstances that may arise from
      time to time that could result in a Chair being unavailable to
      oversee the activities of the committee.  The Chair, in
      consultation with the Internet Society President, may appoint a
      substitute from a pool comprised of the liaisons currently serving
      on the committee and he prior year's Chair or designee.

   All of these obligations are important, but there are always at least
   two full liaisons from the confirming bodies already responsible for
   those responsibilities.  It is simply not necessary to make the job
   of helping Nominating Committee understand the IAOC more demanding
   than it must be.

   So, requiring the IAOC to name a formal Liaison to the Nominating
   Committee isn't justified.

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft           IAOC Advisor for Nomcom             August 2017

   Note: In https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/
         msg00520.html, Adrian Farrel challenged the idea that an IAOC
         Advisor to the Nomcom might not be a currently sitting member
         of the IAOC.  Spencer's answers are that the IAOC's membership
         is complex, with a number of ex officio members whose positions
         are subject to Nomcom review, or to IAB review, or to IESG
         review; defining who was, and who was not, eligible to serve as
         IAOC Advisor to the Nomcom would be complicated, and likely
         overtaken by events given that IASA 2.0 is already being
         planned, and could easily change the membership of the IAOC;
         requiring an IAOC Advisor to the Nomcom to be a sitting member
         of the IAOC required us to define a new role, because neither
         the Advisor nor the Liaison role matched the role we would be
         defining; and past IAOCs have sent sitting members to serve, so
         if the IAOC thought that was important, they could certainly
         continue to pick sitting members, but if no sitting member was
         willing/able to serve, the IAOC would be free to do the next
         best thing, and would likely be the best group to decide who to
         send.

         Spencer is, of course, interested in hearing from other people
         about that.

5.  Why an Advisor?

   The editor of this document briefly considered proposing a new and
   IAOC-specific role to [RFC7437], but considered such a proposal to be
   too complex.  Anticipating every corner case in IETF process BCPs is
   challenging and error-prone, and as this specification was being
   written, the IETF Chair was sponsoring a design team reviewing all
   aspects of the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA), so the
   structure of the IAOC itself could be changing in a relatively short
   period of time.  Instead, the decision was made to describe how the
   IAOC provides an Advisor to the Nominating Committee, building on
   mature text that has survived many Nominating Committee cycles.

   After investigation, the definition of Advisor in [RFC7437]
   Section 4.9 seemed appropriate.

      An advisor is responsible for such duties as specified by the
      invitation that resulted in the appointment.

      Advisors do not vote on the selection of candidates.

   The position described in this specification would be filled by a
   non-voting member of the Nominating Committee, who is knowledgeable
   about the operations of the IAOC, with duties that could evolve over
   time as the IAOC itself evolves.

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft           IAOC Advisor for Nomcom             August 2017

   The only difference between this advisor and any other advisor that
   requires an update to [RFC7437], is that committee members are
   explicitly encouraged to suggest that an advisor be appointed, as
   described in this specification.  The text updating [RFC7437] is
   found in Section 6.

6.  BCP Text Changes

   This section provides the updated BCP text for [RFC7437].

   For each OLD text selection, NEW text is provided that replaces the
   OLD text in [RFC7437].

6.1.  Change to Section 4.3, 'Structure'

   OLD

      Any committee member may propose the addition of an advisor to
      participate in some or all of the deliberations of the committee.
      The addition must be approved by the committee according to its
      established voting mechanism.  Advisors participate as
      individuals.

   NEW

      Any committee member may propose the addition of an advisor to
      participate in some or all of the deliberations of the committee.
      The addition must be approved by the committee according to its
      established voting mechanism.  Advisors participate as
      individuals.

      Committee members are encouraged to propose the addition of an
      advisor who is knowledgeable about the operations of the IAOC,
      whether or not that Nominating Committee is reviewing an IAOC
      position.  The Nominating Committee may choose to ask the IAOC to
      suggest an advisor who is knowledgeable about IAOC operations.

7.  Security Considerations

   This document updates an IETF process BCP and has no direct Internet
   security implications.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document makes no requests of IANA, and the RFC Editor can
   safely remove this section during publication.

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft           IAOC Advisor for Nomcom             August 2017

9.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to Alissa Cooper, Alvaro Retana, Leslie Daigle, Russ Housley,
   and Ted Hardie for providing feedback on questions arising during
   work on early versions of this document.

10.  Normative References

   [RFC4071]  Austein, R., Ed. and B. Wijnen, Ed., "Structure of the
              IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101,
              RFC 4071, DOI 10.17487/RFC4071, April 2005,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4071>.

   [RFC7437]  Kucherawy, M., Ed., "IAB, IESG, and IAOC Selection,
              Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the
              Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 7437,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7437, January 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7437>.

Author's Address

   Spencer Dawkins
   Wonder Hamster Internetworking LLC

   Email: spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com

Dawkins                 Expires February 9, 2018                [Page 7]