Re: IAOC Request for community feedback

[Tina TSOU <[e-mail]>]

Dear Bob,
It is reasonable to declare Marshall's IAOC position vacant.
As far as I know, his wife had medical issue this year.


Thank you,
Tina

On Oct 23, 2012, at 1:50 AM, "The IAOC" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The IAOC is requesting feedback from the community concerning a
> vacancy that the IAOC feels is not adequately covered by existing IETF
> rules.
> 
> Marshall Eubanks has been a active IETF participant for many years and
> a member of the IAOC since 2009. However, he recently stopped
> participating in the IAOC and Trust. The IAOC has made extensive
> efforts to contact Marshall about this, but has not received any
> response. Given the size of the IAOC, a missing member makes it much
> harder to get a quorum. The specifics of his absence include:
> 
> - Missed the IAOC calls on 11 October 2012, 10 September 2012,
>   6 September 2012, 23 August 2012
> 
> - No email received from Marshall since 1 August 2012 on the IAOC,
>   IETF Trust, and related private lists.
> 
> Marshall is subscribed to the IAOC and IETF Trust lists and
> consequently should have received email discussing regular
> IAOC/Trust business including email on this topic.
> 
> We have tried to contact Marshall over this time period using email 14
> times, telephone 6 times (leaving messages), SMS messages seven times,
> Linkedin messages once, Facebook messages once, and registered postal
> mail twice. We have not received any response from Marshall. It is
> also our understanding that Marshall has stopped participating in
> other IETF lists and stopped working on IDs he authored.
> 
> On 6 September 2012 the IAOC appointed a replacement liaison to the
> IETF NomCom after learning from the NomCom chair that Marshall had not
> responded to emails from the NomCom chair.
> 
> Based on all of this, the IAOC has concluded that Marshall's IAOC position
> is vacant.
> 
> The IAOC has reviewed BCP101 and concludes it does not handle this
> case very well. BCP101 says that if "an IAOC member abrogates his or
> her duties" the recall process in BCP10/RFC3777 may be used. The
> specific text is:
> 
>   IAOC members are subject to recall in the event that an IAOC member
>   abrogates his or her duties or acts against the best interests of the
>   IETF community. Any appointed IAOC member, including any appointed
>   by the IAB, IESG, or ISOC Board of Trustees, may be recalled using
>   the recall procedure defined in RFC 3777 [RFC3777]. IAOC members are
>   not, however, subject to recall by the bodies that appointed them.
> 
>   If a vacancy occurs among the appointed members, this is filled by
>   the appointing body for that position according to its procedures.
> 
> The conditions for determining that a vacancy exist are not well-defined.
> 
> BCP10/RFC3777 (Section 7) defines a process where a recall petition is
> signed by 20 NomCom qualified IETFers, the petition is sent to the
> ISOC President, the ISOC President appoints a recall committee chair,
> the chair follows normal NomCom procedures to select 20 committee
> members (this includes a public call for volunteers, max of two per
> organization, random selection of volunteers, etc.), recall committee
> investigates, recall committee votes and requires a 3/4 majority to
> pass the recall.
> 
> We think this process was not intended to be used when a sitting IAOC,
> IESG, or IAB member vacates his/her position. We believe that the
> intended use of this process was for determining whether a member
> should leave a position who is unwilling to leave and who has harmed
> the IETF. That is clearly not the case in this situation, to the
> contrary, we would have preferred Marshall to continue. It doesn't
> seem appropriate in this case, or when an member is unable to
> participate due to illness or death.
> 
> The IAOC believes that it is reasonable to declare Marshall's IAOC
> position vacant and, therefore, to ask NomCom to fill his position for
> the remainder of his term (~15 months.)
> 
> The IAOC is requesting feedback from the community whether it is
> reasonable to declare Marshall's IAOC position vacant. Responses are
> solicited by no later than 5 November 2012. If there is not community
> support for this approach, the IAOC will pursue the BCP10/RFC3777
> recall petition path because having a missing member for 15 months
> significantly effects the operation of the IAOC and IETF Trust.
> 
> Please send your comments to <[e-mail]>.
> 
> The IAOC and IETF chairs will review the community feedback and make a
> determination if there is support for declaring the position vacant.
> 
> I would add that we all feel very badly for Marshall given his many
> years of service to the IETF. We really don't understand why he is not
> responding and are concerned about it. Unfortunately, we don't know
> what else to do given his lack of response to our many attempts to
> contact him.
> 
> Bob Hinden
> IAOC Chair
> 
> p.s. A draft is in progress that proposes an update to
> BCP10/RFC3777 similar to what we propose here to handle how cases of
> vacancy be handled. The issue applies to the IAB, IESG, and the IAOC.
> An announcement will be sent when that is available.