Re: DISCUSSION: define the role of a liaison

[Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>]

    Date:        Sun, 17 Mar 2002 14:54:47 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
    From:        James M Galvin <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com>
    Message-ID:  <Pine.WNT.4.43.0203171446240.-561305@oemcomputer.ietf53.cw.net>

  | However, admittedly, upon rereading, the wording could be construed as
  | ambiguous.  I think there's an interpretation possible that defines
  | "members" as the voting members

That's how I would interpret it - I certainly wouldn't consider a liaison
as a member of an organisation (or not by virtue of being a liaison).

You didn't even consider the IETF chair a member of the IAB (that isn't
a liaison position) - so certainly you wouldn't be considering the IESG
IRTF, or RFC Editor liaisons as members of the IAB (nor the IAB liaison
to the IESG as an IESG member).   Liaisons certainly aren't members.

  | This ambiguity was certainly not the intent and I will propose changes
  | to remove it.

Yes, I know that...

The IAB and IESG liaisons aren't a problem, as they're always sitting
members, who aren't up for re-nomination.   I thought the current chair
was excluded too.   The past chair was the really odd case (perhaps
because that was added to things late in the game, it wasn't an original
inclusion).

kre