RE: IAB request for clarifications in RFC2727bis

[Phil Roberts <PRoberts@MEGISTO.com>]

Presumably question #2 would have a variant for the ISOC
as well?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leslie Daigle [mailto:leslie@thinkingcat.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 5:09 PM
> To: ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com
> Cc: avri@acm.org
> Subject: IAB request for clarifications in RFC2727bis
> 
> 
> NOMCOM WG,
> 
> Every year, in the course of performing its role of
> confirming the IESG slate, the IAB reviews and applies
> the directives for that role as spelled out in RFC2727.
> Since that document is under revision, the IAB this year 
> compiled a list of knotty questions it and previous IABs have 
> contemplated in applying the rules to fulfill the 
> community's intent.  We think it would be helpful for future 
> IABs if the revised document could address these issues.
> 
> There are 2 general areas we feel are in need of clarification.
> 
> 1/ An overall clarification is needed in terms of how to 
> handle the mid-term transition of a member from one position 
> to another.  That is, if a member of one body, whose term 
> there is not finishing, accepts nomination to an opening in 
> the other body (or a different position in the IESG) as part 
> of the annual cycle, what is the 
> expected practice:
> 
>    Is this an automatic resignation from the first position?
> 
>    When is that resignation effective -- at the end of the
>    IETF meeting when they officially begin their new role?
> 
>    Since it is particularly difficult to gauge precise
>    numbers of months left in the term at that point, is
>    this then a mid-term vacancy to be filled for the rest
>    of the original member's term, or for the rest of the
>    original member's term plus 2 years?
> 
>    How should the nomcom fill the mid-term vacancy:  as part
>    of its slate for the affected body, since it created the
>    vacancy, or by running a separate consideration process
>    once the affected body is made aware of the vacancy
>    (by seeing the confirmed slate).
> 
>    Is it the intent of the Nomcom WG that someone could serve
>    simultaneously on the IESG and as a sitting member of the IAB
>    (i.e. not talking about the IETF Chair special case) ?
> 
>    This is ambiguous in the current procedures, so should be
>    explicitly clarified one way or the other in the next revision.
> 
> 2/ Is the IAB's role to exercise good judgement about the 
> qualifications of each nominee or is the IAB's role limited 
> to process review only?
> 
>    If it is the IAB's role to exercise good judgement, what are the
>    documented criteria for an IESG candidate ?
> 
>    If it is not the IAB's role to exercise good judgement, how does
>    the IAB get sufficient visibility into the Nomcom process to
>    exercise a purely process-oversight role without breaching the
>    confidentiality and without intruding on Nomcom's deliberations ?
> 
> 
> 
> Leslie,
> for the IAB.
> 
> -- 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Reality:
>      Yours to discover."
>                                 -- ThinkingCat
> Leslie Daigle
> leslie@thinkingcat.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>
>