Re: IAB request for clarifications in RFC2727bis

[James M Galvin <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com>]

On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Leslie Daigle wrote:

    As I said -- the process you outlined seems reasonable; it's
    just not what appears to be documented.

I have always believed and defended that a fundamental tenet of the
NOMCOM document is to behave and execute "in the best interests of the
community."

So, to interpret the document as strictly as you are suggesting is not,
in my opinion of course, in the best interests of the community.

Further, the first rule of the operation of the NOMCOM is that the group
as a whole can make up rules (not otherwise covered) as it needs to
complete its responsibilities in a timely fashion.

In the scenario you lay out it is only the timing that is at issue.  You
are not inventing an end-game or a process that could not ordinarily be
covered by the current procedures.

Yes, you could wait to announce the resignation until the confirmed
candidates are announced, but to what end?  So the IESG/IAB has to
operate 1 person short waiting for a mid-term vacancy to be filled?  So
the NOMCOM has to work an extra 6 weeks to fill the mid-term vacancy?
So you don't breach confidentiality asking the Executive Director (and
whoever else you need to ask) to help you put together a job
description?

If the resignation is going to happen I believe you can use the "invent
rules as needed" clause to proceed as needed to make the most efficient
use of the resources available.

Jim