Re: [Eligibility-discuss] don't repeat what's not changing in 8713: Ineligibility by being a board/group member.

[Luc André Burdet <[e-mail]>]

Just 2 cents on “replacing 4.14 in its entirety”,  4.14 has other portions that would need to be repeated else they would be ‘replaced’ by nothing ?

PR: https://github.com/ietf-wg-elegy/rfc8989bis/pull/2

NomCom eligibility, and makes recommendations on how the process of
qualification based on attendance should work.
This document replaces the attendance criteria in {{Section 4.14 of RFC8713}} with
criteria loosely based on those in {{!RFC8989}}.
The other paragraphs of {{Section 4.14 of RFC8713}}
remain intact.

Regards,
Luc André

Luc André Burdet |  Cisco  |  [e-mail]  |  Tel: [phone]


From: Eligibility-discuss <[e-mail]> on behalf of Lars Eggert <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, September 22, 2022 at 02:37
To: John C Klensin <[e-mail]>
Cc: Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>, Martin Duke <[e-mail]>, Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: [Eligibility-discuss] don't repeat what's not changing in 8713: Ineligibility by being a board/group member.
Hi,

AD hat on.

On 2022-9-21, at 21:31, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> FWIW, there is an argument for completely replacing 8713 rather
> than adjusting things where needed but relying on it for
> everything else.

There is that argument, and it was brought up in discussion, but:

> While I suspect it would be impractical given the schedule,

This. We need to have a specific fix in place by the time the next NomCom cycle starts, and I believe this will not be possible if we open up all of 8713.

> If we cannot do that,
> the second-best (and more practical) option would be to make it
> extremely clear that one looks in this document for a complete
> replacement for Section 4.14 (and maybe 4.15, see below) of RFC
> 8713 and that 8713 is authoritative for everything else.

That seems like an actionable suggestion, and your text suggestion (which I cut) looks reasonable to me.

I'm open to discussing a rechartering of the WG to do other changes to the NomCom eligibility criteria after it has delivered its chartered work item, but not before.

Thanks,
Lars