Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Virtual BoF for draft-moonesamy-recall-rev

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

> On 11 Jun 2019, at 13:37, Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> H/mm..  These don't seem like "issues" so much as restatements of the solution SM's draft proposes.
> 
> To take a specific one, what issue is addressed by reducing the number of people required to sign the petition?
> 

Fewer people would have to set themselves up as targets for retribution; the pool of people able to serve on the recall committee is marginally increased.

Eliot

> -Ekr
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 4:22 AM Adrian Farrel <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> That's nice. I like the clarity.
> 
> I also like that the worms are kept firmly in their cans. It is without
> doubt that a hundred other issues concerning the recall process could be
> aired, and I am certain that many people have different hot issues. But I
> firmly believe that addressing a few at a time is the best (only!) way to
> make progress.
> 
> If it turns out that there is support for resolving any of these three
> issues, they can be quickly picked off and we can move on to other issues if
> there is interest. If there is no support for addressing these three
> concerns, then they can be put to one side and work can start on other
> issues if there is interest.
> 
> For my part, I think that all three issues should be addressed, and I think
> that the approaches suggested in SM's draft are a good starting point for
> discussion.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eligibility-discuss <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> On Behalf
> Of S Moonesamy
> Sent: 11 June 2019 11:45
> To: Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>;
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Cc: John C Klensin <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>; Warren Kumari <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>;
> Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Subject: Re: [Eligibility-discuss] Virtual BoF for
> draft-moonesamy-recall-rev
> 
> Hi Suresh,
> 
> Please see a revised version of the BOF proposal to address your comments:
> 
> Problem statement
> 
>       The current description of the process for initiating petitions
> for recalls
>       for NomCom-appointed roles is described in RFC 7437 and is
> being updated in
>       draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis.  The scope of this work addresses only
> three
>       specific issues with the petition process; other parts of the
> recall model
>       and other ways of removing Nomcom-appointees are explicitly out of
> scope.
> 
>       The three issues are:
> 
>       - Ineligibility of remote participants to seek redress through the
>         recall process;
> 
>       - Reducing the number of signatories for a recall petition;
> 
>       - Ineligibility of IAB and IESG Members and other Nomcom
>         Appointees to sign a recall petition.
> 
> The purpose of the BOF is to examine the above-mentioned issues and
> determine,
> for each, whether it is sufficient interest and importance.
> draft-moonesamy-recall-rev
> is a possible starting point for the effort.
> 
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
> 
> --
> Eligibility-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss>
> 
> --
> Eligibility-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss>
> --
> Eligibility-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss