IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Fri, 13 March 2020 13:50 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 BF91F3A0771 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 XtnEr199wlVa for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.117.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14F5A3A076E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 06:50:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F11220F9A; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:50:50 +0200 (EET)
Received: from gw03.mail.saunalahti.fi (gw03.mail.saunalahti.fi [195.197.172.111]) by vs24.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73A9220EFF; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:50:50 +0200 (EET)
Received: from eggert.org (unknown [62.248.255.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: eggert@elisanet.fi) by gw03.mail.saunalahti.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BEA320002; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:50:47 +0200 (EET)
Received: from stickers.eggert.org (stickers.eggert.org [172.24.110.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8EC3868250D; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:50:42 +0200 (EET)
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <EC8024D5-B1D7-4DCD-862D-88167A7C00BF@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FC58D6EC-8FD4-43A7-95DA-E47E457D6995"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
Subject: Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:50:41 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CALaySJ+kFVXrVAkYLaO6MaPqDA29MzXhVFcxG0c6hZcBs-LqnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <CALaySJ+kFVXrVAkYLaO6MaPqDA29MzXhVFcxG0c6hZcBs-LqnQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 8EC3868250D.A223C
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ZjLR7-O2WD8p-cnOc3jENrsCJmQ>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 13:50:54 -0000

Hi,

On 2020-3-13, at 15:43, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
> For convenient reference, the current rules for an IETF participant to
> be eligible to be a voting member of a NomCom (Section 4.14 of RFC
> 8713) require attendance in person at three of the last five meetings.
...
> The IESG would like the community’s input: How do *you* think 107
> should be treated in regards to NomCom eligibility?
...
> One choice is to entirely ignore 107 for the purposes of NomCom
> eligibility.

since we canceled 107, ignoring it (as you outline above) seems the obvious approach? I might be missing something, but I don't understand how that is not the obvious answer.

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email