IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IAOC Request for community feedback

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 24 October 2012 07:16 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513BB21F8D0E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:16:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.691
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.691 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_ILLEGAL_IP=1.908, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7FikZ3DN4DYI for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:16:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ea0-f172.google.com (mail-ea0-f172.google.com [209.85.215.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94DD721F8D0C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:16:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ea0-f172.google.com with SMTP id k13so56424eaa.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=iaSko/l8DLm0kJM/NNIhMzrQfQqIDTyQLAlstv2JVZc=; b=u+of06TfhT1gtm2//25XiMJQr5miwEucc3SbZfnvH9+2fyGabvco8WlgyeJiYSh8m2 ul53jH+VPAL9asgxyL32y4oaBKbog8CRvatK2jc/rZVq53FrRLER9Q46ggrkMBZXUgsq RKAmuKTyi49LC4mCNUNo8l5wtDnx747p1H9PVrxG5pJMAp1+MHf0kg466eqgeUxZ6FSg DvlpVJBWmibUxJqjhldPgDz8qG3z+4upaGabJbqUbHj7TKPu7/oo9lEFqdPBM++zdtH8 /w3LyA9kFu2VhN4vc2HgMD1muiu28KyVuVv9kG4qOb1VpznB2K5RbeuKL32g4vSjUnFd s2RQ==
Received: by 10.14.215.69 with SMTP id d45mr20095165eep.16.1351063003694; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:16:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (host-2-101-189-188.as13285.net. [2.101.189.188]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r45sm24250920eem.6.2012.10.24.00.16.41 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 24 Oct 2012 00:16:42 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <508795D7.1050102@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 08:16:39 +0100
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Kessens <david.kessens@nsn.com>
Subject: Re: IAOC Request for community feedback
References: <20121023192135.203AC18C0A4@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <5086EF82.9060900@dougbarton.us> <20121023200713.GC1861@nsn.com>
In-Reply-To: <20121023200713.GC1861@nsn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, Noel Chiappa <jnc@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 07:16:45 -0000

On 23/10/2012 21:07, David Kessens wrote:
> Doug,
> 
> On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 12:26:58PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:
>> You're not proposing a change in procedure. You're proposing to ignore
>> one. 
> 
> No procedure is ignored.
> 
> BCP 101 does not define the rules for declaring a position vacant. In
> absense of such rules, the IAOC decided to consult with the community
> whether the community agrees that the position is now vacant.

Exactly. To my mind, a member who ceases to participate, and fails to
reply to messages indicating that the seat is about to be declared
vacant, has created a vacancy. I think the IAOC is behaving appropriately.

> Another avenue, which is also mentioned in the BCP, that could have been
> followed is the recall procedure. However, the IAOC felt that it was not
> really intended for a situation where somebody apparently has vacated their
> position.

Agreed. It could be used for that, but I don't see it as required.
We aren't dealing with alleged misbehaviour.

    Brian Carpenter

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email