Re: New Version Notification for draft-leiba-3777upd-eligibility-01.txt

[John C Klensin <[e-mail]>]

--On Friday, August 17, 2012 15:05 -0400 Barry Leiba
<[e-mail]> wrote:

> Russ has raised a couple of good points.  I like John's
> solution to one of them, and SM has proposed a good solution
> to the other off list.  I have the following changes in the
> pending next version.
> 
> I've slightly edited John's text, and Section 4, bullet 3,
> paragraph 1 will now change to this:
> 
>    The nominating committee comprises a Chair, ten voting
> volunteers,    the immediate past nominating committee Chair
> as an advisor, plus    liaisons and possible additional
> advisor(s) as described herein.

Yes, much better.  I realized after I sent the note that I
intended to say "Section 4 of RFC 3777 as amended by subsequent
documents including this one", but your text is more to the
point.

> SM suggests fixing the "liaisons" issue by changing the
> definition of "sitting member" instead of by trying to explain
> it in bullet 15.1.  I agree that that's cleaner.
> 
> The update to Section 2, paragraph 6 will change to this:
> 
> sitting member:  A person who is currently serving a term of
> membership       in, and having a standing to participate in
> the decisions of,       the IESG, the IAB, the IAOC, or the
> ISOC Board of Trustees.       Liaisons from other bodies are
> not sitting members, by this definition.       (For example,
> an IESG liaison to the IAB is not a sitting member of
> the IAB, though it may be a sitting member of the IESG.)

This is still a tad ambiguous in principle (only).  For example,
it isn't clear whether, by that definition, the IAB Chair is a
sitting member of the IESG (no vote, but excluded from the
Nomcom as a sitting member of the IAB) or whether the IETF Chair
is a sitting member of the IAB (votes, but excluded from the
Nomcom anyway as a sitting member of the IESG).  There are other
such cases, but I believe all of them are, in practice, excluded
by some other rule.

>...

So I think it is ok... and the marginal aesthetics are not worth
worrying about.

    john