Network Working Group J. Galvin
Internet-Draft eList eXpress LLC
Expires: December 26, 2002 June 27, 2002
IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation
of the Nominating and Recall Committees
draft-ietf-nomcom-rfc2727bis-01.txt
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://
www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 26, 2002.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected,
confirmed, and recalled is specified. This document is a self-
consistent, organized compilation of the process as it was known at
the time of publication.
Discussion of this Draft
Please direct all comments, suggestions, and questions regarding this
draft to the following mailing list:
ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
To subscribe to that mailing list you may send a message with the
single word "subscribe" in the body to:
ietf-nomcom-request@lists.elistx.com
Or you may visit the web-based subscription manager at:
<http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Nominating Committee Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Nominating Committee Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Member Recall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
7. Changes From RFC2727 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
A. Oral Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
1. Introduction
This document is a revision of and supercedes RFC2727. [2] It is a
complete specification of the process by which members of the IAB and
IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled as of the date of its
approval. However, these procedures are subject to change and such
change takes effect immediately upon its approval, regardless of
whether this document has yet been revised.
The following two assumptions continue to be true of this
specification.
1. The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and Internet Research
Steering Group (IRSG) are not a part of the process described
here.
2. The organization (and re-organization) of the IESG is not a part
of the process described here.
The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of
reference. The time frames assume that the IETF meets three times
per calendar year with approximately equal amounts of time between
them. The meetings are referred to as the First IETF, Second IETF,
or Third IETF as needed.
The next section lists the words and phrases commonly used throughout
this document with their intended meaning.
The majority of this document is divided into four major topics as
follows.
General: This a set of rules and constraints that apply to the
selection and confirmation process as a whole.
Nominating Committee Selection: This is the process by which
volunteers from the IETF community are recognized to serve on the
committee that nominates candidates to serve on the IESG and IAB.
Nominating Committee Operation: This is the set of principles, rules,
and constraints that guide the activities of the nominating
committee, including the confirmation process.
Member Recall: This is the process by which the behavior of a sitting
member of the IESG or IAB may be questioned, perhaps resulting in
the removal of the sitting member.
A final section describes how this document differs from its
predecessor: RFC2727. [2]
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
An appendix of useful facts and practices collected from previous
nominating committees is also included.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
2. Definitions
The following words and phrases are commonly used throughout this
document. They are listed here with their intended meaning for the
convenience of the reader.
candidate: A nominee who has been selected to be considered for
confirmation by a confirming body.
confirmed candidate: A candidate that has been reviewed and approved
by a confirming body.
nominating committee term: The term begins when its members are
officially announced, which is expected to be prior to the Third
IETF to ensure it is fully operational at the Third IETF. The
term ends when the next nominating committee's term begins.
nominee: A person who is being or has been considered for one or more
open positions of the IESG or IAB.
sitting member: A person who is currently serving a term of
membership in the IESG, IAB or ISOC Board of Trustees.
superior candidate: A nominee selected for either the IESG or IAB by
the nominating committee because it believes the nominee's
membership would contribute in such a way as to improve or
otherwise be more desirable to that body as a whole.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
3. General
The following set of rules apply to the selection and confirmation
process as a whole. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the
interpretation of each rule is included.
1. The principal functions of the nominating committee are to review
the open IESG and IAB positions and to either nominate its
incumbent or recruit a superior candidate.
Although there is no term limit for serving in any IESG or IAB
position, the nominating committee may use length of service as
one of its criterion for evaluating an incumbent.
The nominating committee does not select the open positions to be
reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review.
The nominating committee will be given the title of the position
to be reviewed and a brief description of the desirable set of
qualifications of the candidate that is nominated to fill each
position.
Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they wish to
be nominated.
The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it
presents its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as
indicated below.
2. The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be
completed within 3 months.
The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be
completed one month prior to the friday of the week before the
First IETF. It is expected to begin 4 months prior to the Friday
of the week before the First IETF.
3. One-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB positions is
selected to be reviewed each year.
The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately
one-half of each of the sitting IESG and IAB members each year.
It is recognized that circumstances may exist that will require
the nominating committee to review more or less than one-half of
the current positions, e.g., if the IESG or IAB have re-organized
prior to this process and created new positions, or if there are
an odd number of current positions.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
4. Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a 2 year
term.
The intent of this rule is to ensure that members of the IESG and
IAB serve the number of years that best facilitates the review of
one-half of the members each year.
It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
choose one or more of the currently open positions to which it
may assign a term greater than 2 years in order to ensure the
ideal application of this rule in the future.
It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
choose one or more of the currently open positions that share
responsibilities with other positions (both those being reviewed
and those sitting) to which it may assign a term greater than 2
years to ensure that all such members will not be reviewed at the
same time.
All sitting member terms end during the First IETF meeting
corresponding to the end of the term for which they were
confirmed. All confirmed candidate terms begin during the First
IETF meeting corresponding to the beginning of the term for which
they were confirmed. Normally, the confirmed candidate's term
begins when the currently sitting member's term ends on the last
day of the meeting. A term may begin or end no sooner than the
first day of the meeting and no later than the last day of the
meeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the currently
sitting member and the confirmed candidate. The confirmed
candidate's term may overlap the sitting member's term during the
meeting as determined by their mutual agreement.
5. Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented
here with four qualifications.
First, the body with the mid-term vacancy chooses whether to
reconvene the current nominating committee to fill the mid-term
vacancy or to wait until the next nominating committee is
constituted so it can fill the mid-term vacancy. If the body
with the mid-term vacancy chooses to wait there is no further
action required of the current nominating committee.
Second, if the body with the mid-term vacancy chooses to
reconvene the current nominating committee, the selection and
confirmation process is expected to be completed within 1 month,
with all other time periods otherwise unspecified prorated
accordingly. Third, the confirming body has two weeks from the
day it is notified of a candidate to reject the candidate,
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
otherwise the candidate is assumed to have been confirmed.
Fourth, the term of the confirmed candidate will be either:
1. the remainder of the term of the open position if that
remainder is not less than one year.
2. the remainder of the term of the open position plus the next
2 year term if that remainder is less than one year.
6. All deliberations and supporting information that relates to
specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are
confidential.
The nominating committee and confirming body members will be
exposed to confidential information as a result of their
deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and
from those who provide requested supporting information. All
members and all other participants are expected to handle this
information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity.
It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee
members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise
the current committee on deliberations and results of the prior
committee, as necessary and appropriate.
7. Unless otherwise specified, the advise and consent model is used
throughout the process. This model is characterized as follows.
1. The IETF Executive Director informs the nominating committee
of the IESG and IAB positions to be reviewed.
2. The nominating committee selects candidates and advises each
confirming body of its respective slate of candidates.
3. The confirming bodies review their respective slate of
candidates and, in consultation with the nominating
committee, consent to some, all, or none of the candidates.
The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates.
The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB
candidates.
If the entire slate of candidates submitted to a confirming
body is confirmed, the job of the nominating committee with
respect to those open positions is complete.
If some or none of the candidates submitted to a confirming
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
body are confirmed, the purpose of the consultation is to
ensure the nominating committee interacts with the confirming
body both to understand the reason why all the candidates
were not confirmed and to explain their rationale for the
slate. During the course of the consultation the nominating
committee may re-examine the slate of candidates and may
change it in any way.
The confirming body may reject individual candidates. The
nominating committee must select alternate candidates for the
rejected candidates.
Any additional time required by the nominating committee
should not exceed its maximum time allotment.
4. The confirming bodies decide their consent according to a
mechanism of their own choosing, which must ensure that at
least one-half of the sitting members agree with the
decision.
At least one-half of the sitting members of the confirming
bodies must agree to either confirm or reject each individual
nominee. The agreement must be decided within a reasonable
timeframe. The agreement may be decided by conducting a
formal vote, by asserting consensus based on informal
exchanges (email), or by whatever mechanism is used to
conduct the normal business of the confirming body.
8. All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used
by the IETF secretariat for its announcements, including a notice
on the IETF web site.
As of the publication of this document the current mechanism is
an email message to both the "ietf" and the "ietf-announce"
mailing lists.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
4. Nominating Committee Selection
The following set of rules apply to the creation of the nominating
committee and the selection of its members.
1. The process of selecting the members of the nominating committee
is expected to be completed within 2 months.
The selection process is expected to be completed one month
prior to the Third IETF. This ensures there is an opportunity
for the nominating committee to meet and to organize itself
prior to the Third IETF.
2. The term of a nominating committee is expected to be 1 year.
It is the intent of this rule that there be exactly one
nominating committee that is the current, official nominating
committee.
The term of a nominating committee begins when its members are
officially announced. The term ends when the next nominating
committee's term begins.
A term is expected to begin prior to the Third IETF to ensure
the nominating committee has an opportunity to prepare to be
fully operational at the Third IETF.
A nominating committee is expected to complete any work-in-
progress before it is dissolved at the end of its term.
3. The committee comprises at least a non-voting Chair, 10 voting
volunteers, and 3 non-voting liaisons.
Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting
advisor to participate in some or all of the deliberations of
the committee. The addition must be approved by both the voting
and non-voting members of the committee according to its
established voting mechanism. Advisors participate as
individuals.
Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting
liaison from other unrepresented organizations to participate in
some or all of the deliberations of the committee. The addition
must be approved by both the voting and non-voting members of
the committee according to its established voting mechanism.
Liaisons participate as representatives of their respective
organizations.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
4. The Internet Society President appoints the non-voting Chair,
who must meet the usual requirements for membership in the
nominating committee.
The nominating committee Chair must agree to invest the time
necessary to ensure that the nominating committee completes its
assigned duties and to perform in the best interests of the IETF
community in that role.
The appointment must be completed no later than the Second IETF
meeting to ensure it can be announced during a plenary session
at that meeting. This ensures the Chair has approximately two
months to conduct the selection process for the nominating
committee members and approximately one month to organize one or
more initial meetings of the nominating committee prior to the
Third IETF meeting.
5. The Chair must establish and announce milestones for the
selection of the nominating commitee members.
There is a defined time period during which the selection
process must be completed. The Chair must establish a set of
milestones which, if met in a timely fashion, will result in the
completion of the process on time.
6. The Chair obtains the list of IESG and IAB positions to be
reviewed and announces it along with a solicitation for names of
volunteers from the IETF community willing to serve on the
nominating committee.
The solicitation must permit the community at least 30 days
during which they may choose to volunteer to be selected for the
nominating committee.
The list of open positions is published with the solicitation to
facilitate community members choosing between volunteering for
an open position and volunteering for the nominating committee.
7. Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of
the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer.
The 3 meetings are the three most recent meetings that ended
prior to the date on which the solicitation for nominating
committee volunteers was submitted for distribution to the IETF
community.
8. Members of the Internet Society Board of Trustees, sitting
members of the IAB, and sitting members of the IESG may not
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
volunteer.
9. The Chair announces both the list of the pool of volunteers from
which the 10 voting volunteers will be randomly selected and the
method with which the selection will be completed.
The announcement should be made at least 1 week prior to the
date on which the random selection will occur.
The pool of volunteers must be enumerated or otherwise indicated
according to the needs of the method to be used.
The announcement must specify the data that will be used as
input to the method. The method must depend on random data
whose value is not known or available until the date on which
the random selection will occur.
It must be possible to independently verify that the method used
is both fair and unbiased. A method is fair if each eligible
volunteer is equally likely to be selected. A method is
unbiased if no one can influence its outcome in favor of a
specific outcome.
It must be possible to repeat the method, either through
iteration or by restarting in such a way as to remain fair and
unbiased. This is necessary to replace selected volunteers
should they become unavailable after selection.
One possible method is described in RFC2777 [1].
10. The Chair randomly selects and announces the 10 voting
volunteers from the pool of names of volunteers.
There must be two announcements of the members of the voting
members of the nominating committee.
The first announcement should occur as soon after the selection
as is reasonable for the Chair. The community must have at
least 1 week during which any member may challenge the results.
The challenge is made and processed according to the usual IETF
appeals process except that an initial challenge is submitted to
the IETF Chair.
During at least the 1 week challenge period the Chair should
contact each of the selected volunteers and confirm their
willingness and availability to serve. The Chair should make
every reasonable effort to contact each selected volunteer. If
necessary, the Chair may announce and then iterate the selection
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
process in order to replace a volunteer that is unavailable.
There should be at least 1 day between the announcement and the
iteration of the selection process.
After at least 1 week and confirming that 10 voting volunteers
are ready to serve, the Chair makes the second announcement of
the voting members of the nominating committee, which officially
begins the term of the nominating committee.
11. The sitting IAB and IESG members each appoint a non-voting
liaison to the nominating committee from their current
membership who are not sitting in an open position.
12. The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as a
non-voting liaison.
The prior year's Chair may select a designee from a pool
composed of the voting members of the prior year's committee and
all prior Chairs if the Chair is unavailable. If the prior
year's Chair is unavailable and is unable or unwilling to make
such a designation in a timely fashion, the Chair of the current
committee may do so.
Selecting a prior year's committee member as the designee
permits the experience of the prior year's deliberations to be
readily available to the current committee. Selecting an
earlier prior year Chair as the designee permits the experience
of being a Chair as well as that Chair's committee deliberations
to be readily available to the current committee.
13. The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a non-voting
liaison to the nominating committee.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
5. Nominating Committee Operation
The following rules apply to the operation of the nominating
committee. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation
of each rule is included.
The rules are organized approximately in the order in which they
would be invoked.
1. All rules and special circumstances not otherwise specified are
at the discretion of the committee.
Exceptional circumstances will occasionally arise during the
normal operation of the nominating committee. This rule is
intended to foster the continued forward progress of the
committee.
Any member of the committee may propose a rule for adoption by
the committee. The rule must be approved by both the voting and
non- voting members of the committee according to its
established voting mechanism.
All members of the committee should consider whether the
exception is worthy of mention in the next revision of this
document and followup accordingly.
2. The Chair must establish and announce milestones, which must
include at least a call for nominations.
There is a defined time period during which the selection and
confirmation process must be completed. The Chair must
establish a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion,
will result in the completion of the process on time. The Chair
should allow time for iterating the activities of the committee
if one or more candidates is not confirmed.
3. The Chair must establish a voting mechanism.
The committee must be able to objectively determine when a
decision has been made during its deliberations. The criteria
for determining closure must be established and known to all
members of the nominating committee.
4. At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a
vote.
A quorum comprises at least 7 voting members.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
5. The Chair may establish a process by which a member of the
nominating committee may be recalled.
The process, if established, must be agreed to by a 3/4 majority
of the members of the nominating committee, including the non-
voting members since they would be subject to the same process.
6. All members of the nominating committee may participate in all
deliberations.
The emphasis of this rule is that no member, whether voting or
non-voting, can be explicitly excluded from any deliberation.
However, a member may individually choose not to participate in
a deliberation.
7. The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed and the
call for nominees.
The call for nominees must include a request for comments
regarding the past performance of incumbents, which will be
considered during the deliberations of the nominating committee.
The call must request that a nomination include a valid, working
email address, a telephone number, or both for the nominee. The
nomination must include the set of skills or expertise the
nominator believes the nominee has that would be desirable.
8. Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of the
IETF community for any open position.
A self-nomination is permitted.
9. Nominating committee members must not be nominees.
To be a nominee is to enter the process of being selected as a
candidate and confirmed. Nominating committee members are not
eligible to be considered for filling any open position. They
become ineligible as soon as term of the nominating committee on
which they serve officially begins. They remain ineligible for
the duration of this nominating committee's term.
10. Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG or
IAB position during the previous two years must not be nominees.
11. The nominating committee selects candidates based on its
understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the
qualifications required to fill the open positions.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
The intent of this rule is to ensure that the nominating
committee consults with a broad base of the IETF community for
input to its deliberations. In particular, the nominating
committee must determine if the desired qualifications for the
open positions matches its understanding of the qualifications
desired by the IETF community.
The consultations are permitted to include names of nominees, if
all parties to the consultation agree to observe the same
confidentiality rules as the nominating committee itself.
A broad base of the community should include the existing
members of the IAB and IESG, especially sitting members who
share responsibilities with open positions, e.g., co-Area
Directors.
12. Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and
must consent to their nomination prior to being chosen as a
candidate.
Although the nominating committee will make every reasonable
effort to contact and to remain in contact with nominees, any
nominee whose contact information changes during the process and
who wishes to still be considered should inform the nominating
committee of the changes.
A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and
must include a commitment to provide the resources necessary to
fill the open position and an assurance that the nominee will
perform the duties of the position for which they are being
considered in the best interests of the IETF community.
Consenting to a nomination must occur prior to a nominee being a
candidate and may occur as soon after the nomination as needed
by the nominating committee.
Consenting to a nomination must not imply the nominee will be a
candidate.
The nominating committee should help nominees provide
justification to their employers.
13. The nominating committee advises the confirming bodies of their
candidates, specifying a single candidate for each open position
and a testament as to how each candidate meets the
qualifications of an open position.
For each candidate, the testament must include a brief statement
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
of the qualifications for the position that is being filled,
which may be exactly the qualifications that were requested. If
the qualifications differ from the desired qualifications
originally requested a brief statement explaining the difference
must be included.
The testament may include either or both a brief resume of the
candidate or a brief summary of the deliberations of the
nominating committee.
14. Confirmed candidates must consent to their confirmation and
rejected candidates and nominees must be notified before
confirmed candidates are announced.
It is not necessary to notify and get consent from all confirmed
candidates together. Waiting to notify them all together
permits the nominating committee to reconsider its selection if
necessary.
A nominee may not know they were a candidate and a candidate may
not know they were included in a slate of candidates. This
permits a candidate to be rejected by a confirming body without
knowing about the rejection. Prior to announcing a confirmed
candidate the nominating committee must ensure the candidate is
prepared to serve.
Rejected nominees who consented to their nomination must be
notified prior to announcing the confirmed candidates. Rejected
candidates must be notified prior to announcing the confirmed
candidates. Waiting to notify them until after the slate of
candidates has been confirmed permits the nominating committee
to reconsider its selection if necessary.
It is not necessary to announce all confirmed candidates
together. Waiting to announce them all together permits the
nominating committee to reconsider its selection if necessary.
15. The nominating committee should archive the information it has
collected or produced for a period of time not to exceed the its
term.
The purpose of the archive is to assist the nominating committee
should it be necessary for it to fill a mid-term vacancy.
The existence of an archive, how it is implemented, and what
information to archive is at the discretion of the committee.
The decisions must be approved by the voting members of the
committee.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 17]
The implementation of the archive should make every reasonable
effort to ensure the confidentiality of the information it
contains is maintained.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
6. Member Recall
The following rules apply to the recall process. If necessary, a
paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included.
1. Anyone may request the recall of any sitting IAB or IESG member,
at any time, upon written (email is acceptable) request with
justification to the Internet Society President.
2. Internet Society President shall appoint a Recall Committee
Chair.
The Internet Society President must not evaluate the recall
request. It is explicitly the responsibility of the IETF
community to evaluate the behavior of its leaders.
3. The recall committee is created according to the same rules as is
the nominating committee with the qualifications that the person
being investigated and the person requesting the recall must not
be a member of the recall committee in any capacity.
4. The recall committee operates according to the same rules as the
nominating committee with the qualification that there is no
confirmation process.
5. The recall committee investigates the circumstances of the
justification for the recall and votes on its findings.
The investigation must include at least both an opportunity for
the member being recalled to present a written statement and
consultation with third parties.
6. A 3/4 majority of the members who vote on the question is
required for a recall.
7. If a sitting member is recalled the open position is to be filled
according to the mid-term vacancy rules.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
7. Changes From RFC2727
This section describes the changes from RFC2727 that are currently
incorporated in this draft. The changes represent a proposal to the
working group for it to review and approve, with any additional
changes the consensus of the working group determines are necessary.
Comments, suggestions, or questions should be directed to the mailing
list for this working group.
This proposal does not respond to all of the open issues before this
working group. There are additional issues yet to be resolved that
are not covered in this proposal.
Editorial changes are not described here, only substantive changes.
They are listed here in the order in which they appear in the
document.
1. A section with definitions for words and phrases used throughout
the document was inserted. Suggestions for additional entries
are welcome.
2. A comment about term limits was added to Section 3 Rule 1.
3. In Section 3 Rule 1 the NOMCOM must now be provided with a brief
description of the desirable set of qualifications for the
candidate to be nominated for each position.
4. In Section 3 Rule 5 the body with the mid-term vacancy may now
choose either to reconvene the current NOMCOM to fill it or to
wait for the next NOMCOM to fill it.
5. The characterization of the advise and consent model (Section 3
Rule 7) was revised to require the nominating committee and the
confirming body to consult during the approval process.
6. In Section 3 Rule 8 was added to define that all announcements
are made with the usual IETF secretariat mechanism.
7. Section 4, Nominating Committee Selection, was re-organized so
that explicit timeframes could be specified for the various
steps in the selection process. The following suggestions are
included in the re-organization.
1. The selection process must be completed within 2 months.
2. A term was defined for a nominating committee.
3. Liaisons and advisors are no longer required to meet the
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
usual requirements for nominating committee membership.
4. The Chair must be appointed by and announced during the
Second IETF.
5. The IETF community can challenge the results of the
selection process that determined the members of the
nominating committee.
6. The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a non-
voting liaison.
8. In Section 5 Rule 7 nominations for open positions should
include both contact information and a description of the skills
or expertise the nominator believes the nominee possesses.
9. In Section 5 Rule 12 nominees are requested to keep the
nominating committee informed of changes in their contact
information. Editorially, the distinction between a nominee and
candidate was emphasized.
10. In Section 5 Rule 13 a description of a testament to be provided
with a slate to a confirming body by the nominating committee is
specified.
11. Section 5 Rule 14 regarding the announcement of confirmed
candidates was substantially rewritten to make it easier to
understand.
12. In Section 5 Rule 15 was added stating that the nominating
committee is permitted to keep an archive for the duration of
its term of the information it collects and produces for its use
during its term.
13. Section 9, Security Considerations, was expanded.
14. Appendix A, Oral Tradition, has been added. Suggestions for
additional information to include are welcome.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
8. Acknowledgements
There have been a number of people involved with the development of
this document over the years. A great deal of credit goes to the
first three Nominating Committee Chairs:
1993 - Jeff Case
1994 - Fred Baker
1995 - John Curran
who had the pleasure of operating without the benefit of a documented
process. It was their fine work and oral tradition that became the
first version of this document. Of course we can not overlook the
bug discovery burden that each of the Chairs since the first
publication have had to endure:
1996 - Guy Almes
1997 - Geoff Houston
1998 - Mike St. Johns
1999 - Donald Eastlake
2000 - Avri Doria
2001 - Bernard Adoba
2002 - Ted T'so
Of course the bulk of the credit goes to the members of the POISSON
Working Group, previously the POISED Working Group. The prose here
would not be what it is were it not for the attentive and insightful
review of its members. Specific acknowledgement must be extended to
Scott Bradner and John Klensin, who have consistently contributed to
the improvement of this document throughout its evolution.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
9. Security Considerations
Any selection, confirmation, or recall process necessarily involves
investigation into the qualifications and activities of prospective
candidates. The investigation may reveal confidential or otherwise
private information about candidates to those participating in the
process. Each person who participates in any aspect of the process
must maintain the confidentiality of any and all information not
explicitly identified as suitable for public dissemination.
When the nominating committee decides it is necessary to share
confidential or otherwise private information with others, the
dissemination must be minimal and must include a prior committment
from all persons consulted to observe the same confidentiality rules
as the nominating committee itself.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
References
[1] Eastlake, D., "Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection", RFC
2777, February 2000.
[2] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall
Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP
10, RFC 2727, February 2000.
[3] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall
Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP
10, RFC 2282, February 1998.
Author's Address
James M. Galvin
eList eXpress LLC
607 Trixsam Road
Sykesville, MD 21784
US
Phone: +1 410-549-4619
Fax: +1 410-795-7978
EMail: galvin+ietf@elistx.com
URI: http://www.elistx.com/
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
Appendix A. Oral Tradition
Over the years various nominating committees have learned through
oral tradition passed on by liaisons that there are certain
consistencies in the process and information considered during
deliberations. Some items from that oral tradition are collected
here to facilitate its consideration by future nominating committees.
1. It has been found that experience as an IETF Working Group Chair
or an IRTF Research Group Chair is helpful in giving a nominee
experience of what the job of an Area Director involves. It is
also helps a nominating committee judge the technical, people,
and process management skills of the nominee.
2. No person should ever be nominated to serve on both the IESG and
the IAB concurrently; this does not apply to the IETF Chair who
serves on both bodies by definition.
3. The strength of the IAB is found in part in the balance of the
demographics of its members (e.g., national distribution, years
of experience, gender, etc.), the combined skill set of its
members, and the combined sectors (e.g., industry, academia,
etc.) represented by its members.
4. There are no term limits explicitly because the issue of
continuity versus turnover should be evaluated each year
according to the expectations of the IETF community, as it is
understood by each nominating committee.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Galvin Expires December 26, 2002 [Page 26]
