Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC Advisor to the Nominating Committee
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Thu, 24 August 2017 14:58 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A3BE132962 for <ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:58:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZkgzxhyumOFI for <ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D34FB132940 for <ietf-nomcom@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:58:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1dktag-000EZU-91; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:58:38 -0400
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 10:58:32 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
cc: NomCom-Discussion <ietf-nomcom@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <F313896EC3A928CD74DD7271@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-dsUt-bwtFiDY3Lek52QnmJT6z4O9+Bv3Py1He1vMW3-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKKJt-cd2-tS=3QnvRcsDKcZ8=o5Z98wUr-=tp8OeP9J1M0M8g@mail.gmail.com> <4622.1502292425@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <CAKKJt-fxhFnnK3T2nVj2bD=Ve7z6L0oJFjYFqBb59TusJDwFzQ@mail.gmail.com> <1250df52-b5b3-4f71-bab1-790d156af1e9@nostrum.com> <5f26388a-93aa-7133-6973-de669a9bb2f4@gmail.com> <CAA=duU2hn-6=OzvZrfuz0agvzxvV0euXP4nsnjdksUpsnAyfJQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAKKJt-chkcrJRfCU1_MHb47H7GZNHafkbwVZKNsxh2pQzXyiYA@mail.gmail.c om> <6e62d88a-ba0e-18eb-3a45-88851b6e7c46@joelhalpern.com> <CAKKJt-dJ2Z1wsqXveg7+PR13d2bH61pHR753gEamwqWv4f+hKQ@mail.gmail.com> <0c83a20d-325b-d928-a157-638fcaf81adf@cs.tcd.ie> <CAKKJt-dsUt-bwtFiDY3Lek52QnmJT6z4O9+Bv3Py1He1vMW3-A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-nomcom/2EVLeBiNJhk7ADP6ZQMU3bEuIsE>
Subject: Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC Advisor to the Nominating Committee
X-BeenThere: ietf-nomcom@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions of possible revisions to the NomCom process <ietf-nomcom.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-nomcom>, <mailto:ietf-nomcom-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-nomcom/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-nomcom@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-nomcom-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-nomcom>, <mailto:ietf-nomcom-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 14:58:43 -0000
--On Tuesday, August 22, 2017 22:11 -0500 Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > On your other points, I think I know what to do with your > feedback, but this one is worth talking about some more. > > There are different levels of "Nomcoms needing someone who > speaks IAOC-ese fairly fluently". > > I'm shooting for "don't forget to think about how you'll know > whether you've got a viable IAOC candidate to forward to the > confirming body, and if you don't know who can help, the IAOC > should be well-placed to make suggestions about people > who can help". > > I could be shooting for "the Nomcom has to ask for help", or > even "has to ask the IAOC for help". > > At the extreme, I could be shooting for "change the definition > of committee membership so that if you don't have > representation from the IAOC, you've got a really big > problem", to match not having a liaison from the IAB or IESG. > > Are people comfortable with this being more permissive than > prescriptive? Spencer, I'm almost always comfortable with more permissive or, more specifically, with guidelines and principles rather than rules. That is in part because I think the IETF has a terrible track record when we try to make specific rules, almost always discovering either that they are not quite right and require either workarounds or more effort to try to fix or because they lead to quibbling about the rules rather than getting useful work done. However, as I've tried to say before, I'm worried about a different problem in this case, which is whether, as the individual knowledge of Nomcom members goes down, the presence of all of those liaisons could have undue influence by any of: (i) influencing the Nomcom for or against particular candidates. (ii) influencing the Nomcom too much about the role of the relevant bodies or job descriptions. That is especially hazardous because part of the original intent of the Nomcom was that it be able to make decisions that particular bodies were going in the wrong direction and then make appointments with the express intention of changing that. (iii) Having a chilling effect on community members who wanted to make comments (favorable or unfavorable) about particular candidates that they wouldn't want generally known, or known to the candidates or their supporters or opponents... especially when the liaison was believed to have a strong (again, whether positive or negative) relationship with that candidate. These are obviously far more general issues than how to add an IAOC liaison or how, but I believe that specifying an additional liaison, especially from a body with the composition and role of the IAOC, could considerable amplify any issues or concerns of that type. best, john
- [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC Advis… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Michael Richardson
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… S Moonesamy
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Michael Richardson
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Joel Halpern
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… John C Klensin
- Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC A… Spencer Dawkins at IETF