Re: [ietf-nomcom] BCP 10 Update, adding an IAOC Advisor to the Nominating Committee

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 24 August 2017 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 B9AE91329B8 for <ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:17:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 rsgM0lMibXas for <ietf-nomcom@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B290A126C7A for <ietf-nomcom@ietf.org>; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 09:17:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D1A2BE55; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 17:17:27 +0100 (IST)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qgyx5Q4sMsdE; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 17:17:27 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [134.226.36.93] (bilbo.dsg.cs.tcd.ie [134.226.36.93]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A77EBE50; Thu, 24 Aug 2017 17:17:27 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1503591447; bh=8rxhIQIHBbrS8V9R9VdFCH/myK2xch2uEF+wImq6oL0=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=E0l3EpmWoTu6QPRflEJxtFx/1CQOjgffa5mmXfyWP0LDuivofiIA0GHOlHfHYvdFC QxroOJBtokylqVZMWMeLMKZpTGnDtXojE9mM3lxxmO6xIsXg8unN/C7NPHxuwrCeZ2 8fidA721sLZmAMZqkARcsaE3njV7E0ZRBvX5foio=
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: NomCom-Discussion <ietf-nomcom@ietf.org>
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.com> <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>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <2e2ecf8a-e843-795b-f96b-b183e2b3a84c@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2017 17:17:26 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-dsUt-bwtFiDY3Lek52QnmJT6z4O9+Bv3Py1He1vMW3-A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="RiC82x5PDdLg9soxihVGb93V7snQOl84K"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-nomcom/W_bcsGKTa3bcEbX1ZRTHtBjQhMo>
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 16:17:33 -0000

Hiya,

On 23/08/17 04:11, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
> Hi, Stephen,
> 
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 8:53 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
> wrote:
> 
>>
>> Hiya,
>>
>> FWIW, my take:
>>
>> - I don't care if we use the term liaison or advisor
>> - I do think the IAOC has to pick the person
>> - I do think every nomcom needs such a person helping
>>   out
>>
> 
> Sorry for my delay in responding.

Ditto:-)

> 
> 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.

It's not a hill on which I'd die, but I don't think it extreme
to expect every nomcom to have an IAOC-helper, even for years
when there is no IAOC appointment for nomcom to make. So I think
your last target above is the better one.

I am fine with the description of "helper" being vague-ish to
allow for iasa2 etc.

Cheers,
S.

> 
> Are people comfortable with this being more permissive than prescriptive?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Spencer
> 
> 
>> - I'm fine if a recent but not current IAOC member is
>>   the stuckee, where recent is say <= 2 years since
>>   being an IAOC appointee. Weasel wording around that
>>   goal is fine so long as the intent is clear.
>> - If the stuckee is not a current IAOC member, then I
>>   think there needs to be some form of appeal of the
>>   appointment possible, even if that's via some hard
>>   to exercise mechanism.
>>
>> S.
>>
>>
>