Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom

Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> Thu, 08 January 2015 22:30 UTC

Return-Path: <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FD051A0095 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:30:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 KDAkaSs6NNMl for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ig0-x22e.google.com (mail-ig0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8573D1A1B1E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:30:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ig0-f174.google.com with SMTP id hn15so5233081igb.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:30:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=uLuNJH+tdKOglciNgAxfp0BHI2n2Fn+TU5+dv6MgIQk=; b=lZ0PVFdBltfO1uRfqEMBGnXDfW3kmKC6srPeesaO7k295Dt2SBTlUYmI1DdD84BZMm t6CYDAdLcX0JcnKm/JowvLlVRmR4EnkLHphLSF3n9GbmDmc+85G1WSXTpaiav/hE5mDs 6cwG8ZJHlaEJrz+Buik9XFpnUnQPSNDflAt+NAHF34v5yT/eZOHZCXDqFrlZ7xMwxpkv mY3w7WZhx8JnhFkZLcbJhrqizOc5ucGk74IZitfvogyl9DkyNRRWAV8nwWJ3yVU2lypj Lk9wc4pHpiaH/yyIntJepPfVZmlUQQ4ZHmUpGCZcX/w7pI4+1RotalGrJRwTf+jQeNnH yEEQ==
X-Received: by 10.107.136.146 with SMTP id s18mr11602857ioi.36.1420756232730; Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:30:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.16.224.219] ([209.97.127.34]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id u31sm2934564ioi.33.2015.01.08.14.30.31 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 08 Jan 2015 14:30:32 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
Subject: Re: Updating BCP 10 -- NomCom
From: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <246EBEB9-EA10-4E55-BD94-0161BBEF92E7@vigilsec.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:30:22 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7414012C-01C2-4139-98DB-16C6FB52F9DF@gmail.com>
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <D54C3DE17A3E5C7B032F6FB4@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <BC1A05C1-6198-4325-8F46-8E5AB9D0DFCF@cs.georgetown.edu> <20038FAABC32083290783A97@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <F3782236-1AF7-4F9C-8A15-2F9CC8BC8795@cs.georgetown.edu> <54AED784.2070402@gmail.com> <246EBEB9-EA10-4E55-BD94-0161BBEF92E7@vigilsec.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/1wNfdvbyFm6hEivWnoALCgqo0BA>
Cc: Klensin John <john-ietf@jck.com>, Eric Burger <eburger@cs.georgetown.edu>, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 22:30:35 -0000

The IAOC and ISOC Board have given their liaisons similar instructions.  

Bob

> On Jan 8, 2015, at 11:34 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> 
> For several years now, the IESG and IAB have given their liaisons careful instructions.  Each year, those instructions are reviewed with feedback from the previous year liaison.  In my opinion, this is the right place for the annual review of the instructions.  However, I do think that there can be a bit more guidance in BCP 10 that applies to all of the liaisons.  I have a few thoughts:
> 
> 1.  The liaison is expected to act in the best interest of the IETF.
> 
> 2.  During NomCom calls and meetings, the liaison is expected to represent the views of the leadership body rather than personal opinion.
> 
> 3.  The liaison may provide personal feedback to NomCom, but they should only do so using communication channels available to all IETF participants.
> 
> To me, these are consistent with the language that is already present in RFC 3777:
> 
>     Liaisons are expected to represent the views of their respective
>     organizations during the deliberations of the committee.  They
>     should provide information as requested or when they believe it
>     would be helpful to the committee.
> 
> Russ