Re: Question 1 about deadlock issue

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

On Fri, 16 May 2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

    --On 15. mai 2003 09:37 -0400 James M Galvin
    <galvin+ietf-nomcom@eListX.com> wrote:

    > I'm okay with the CB rejecting a candidate I just want them to actually
    > do it.  I am not okay with the CB having the option to step aside and
    > leave the NOMCOM wondering what happened and what to do next.

    would you be happy if the "defaulting" rule required the CB to hold an
    explicit vote before the end of the timeout?

Yes, although I like the text from your followup even better, i.e., the
NOMCOM should not even say it is one-half, just that a decision must be
made.

Ran?

Jim