Re: Challenge: was Re: Updated Nomcom 2020-2021: Result of random selection process

Eliot Lear <> Sat, 11 July 2020 11:20 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4DFD3A09D5 for <>; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 04:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NIhm4JdXP8Gu for <>; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 04:20:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A3643A0C25 for <>; Sat, 11 Jul 2020 04:20:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=3083; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1594466436; x=1595676036; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=3SCgLeYSd97tQBIzESbC+RKAU3+B0KT1JYBA0jxfAAI=; b=G6Qegd6fatn0ehfQDXKis4pd5ROswYOLn+0o1CY9gCbD1oMndVpSDH3Q 1RNHSXVSgvduM0+u46aYuoawJ1adD8CLm32cdPYdiSPx4HB4Nb72xeQVO QvddNa3dhHU4QHPX1kLNUV1E2kq6tsfOhvgLr8xmj9RACraPPp83+gU+S Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BcBADLnwlf/xbLJq1gHAEBAQEBAQc?= =?us-ascii?q?BARIBAQQEAQGCCoNtASAShF+JAYdylBeGLoFpCwEBAQwBAS8EAQGETAKCFyU?= =?us-ascii?q?4EwIDAQELAQEFAQEBAgEGBG2FZ4VwBiNWEAsEKRUCAlcGgzmCfacXdoEyE4U?= =?us-ascii?q?+hRaBOI0LggCBOAwQgk0+gQSCcoEGglczgi0EjwgGpg6CZ4MGk3KCYAMekGo?= =?us-ascii?q?8jgStDoNSAgQGBQIVgWojgVczGggbFTsqAYI/PRIZDY42H44SPwNnAgYBBwE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAwmPdwEB?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.75,339,1589241600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="27759911"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 11 Jul 2020 11:20:32 +0000
Received: from [] ([]) by (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 06BBKVVR028779 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 11 Jul 2020 11:20:31 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_B11BE59E-C1ED-409A-85B6-DE624C3326C3"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.\))
Subject: Re: Challenge: was Re: Updated Nomcom 2020-2021: Result of random selection process
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 13:20:31 +0200
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: Toerless Eckert <>, The IETF List <>, "Salz, Rich" <>, Michael StJohns <>
To: Joseph Touch <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client:, []
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 11:20:38 -0000

Joe, Toerless, Mike:

Yoav may be correct about the letter of the rule, but Mike is certainly correct about the spirit.  


The RFC does not take into account all possible failure or exception scenarios.  The chair is expected to adhere to the spirit of the process when the letter fails us.  This may be one of those cases.

The chair should avoid using discretion or influencing in any way the selection of specific individuals.  That is why we produce an ordered list of randomly selected individuals from a pool.
As a corollary corporate affiliation should only play a role in removals and not on additions.  There should be no room for selective substitution on the part of the chair in this process.


Full disclosure: I work for a company that would generally be viewed as a competitor to Huawei and affiliates.  That same company could be viewed as a reason we have these sorts of limits on NOMCOM participation, so take this for what it’s worth.