IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: NomCom procedures revision

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com> Tue, 25 August 2015 23:39 UTC

Return-Path: <superuser@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 AAB371A88DB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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, HTML_MESSAGE=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 PGkmtvVXCvEM for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com (mail-wi0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB2661A88CA for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicja10 with SMTP id ja10so28935678wic.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=2QPf040C15CCrrlI/+CA/vmhcMNchnuh0iOs5HBJsdk=; b=zSmj/+NqQl/xUp7l6LxNaqQ1IFf3VWDj6W3ceFKE55DftHJZ/cLHe1V376BZBJ7hIh bDaZROBosFhkjJa8iewi7kDpIxLz9ls7FiABfl9bHuxLrMd+tiWCwqXrlzDbnr4u2KX7 gapzUOgqoUreP0dqw8LBbQzsIsbmfqWCRhsiUH6DegaqRCdRvD5RFAhl0d+sbK0di271 0Gb7rIxIegbgQlbvSUJyrU1EZpZV+sxJFiAJeZwOJWdQxl7h8mkp/6kibjkutBIokGQt O09iRjDdT1UjDwadQ2o4/9Od6j6r1HJ20hgAuUPz/Q4jSqQuHnKbE3dJW+MA2KmwPyVJ qfgg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.122.132 with SMTP id ls4mr51983871wjb.130.1440545992412; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.28.194.10 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9F0F20D4-BAFE-4C7D-BCB2-86342C5820ED@cursive.net>
References: <CAL0qLwYJzFZT=OgWqiiTw-n6mvb3PPusRtArmPs_d4_qpLfmpg@mail.gmail.com> <9F0F20D4-BAFE-4C7D-BCB2-86342C5820ED@cursive.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:39:52 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL0qLwYddoztoZvzT93t=55hJnKGhvMB77YjkLp+UbaTN_npYw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: NomCom procedures revision
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
To: Joe Hildebrand <hildjj@cursive.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0112ca6429154f051e2b4058"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/aacqG6l-FKpVuDvpFPHmpqr4o9s>
Cc: 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: <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: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 23:39:55 -0000

Coming to consensus on revised NomCom qualification seemed to be the one
issue where there were lots of ideas but not much agreement.  The expired
draft captures one such idea but I wouldn't go so far as to claim it had
any kind of consensus at all.

The rest of the changes in there now didn't seem to be ruffling any
feathers.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Joe Hildebrand <hildjj@cursive.net> wrote:

> It's worth finishing the work.  What else did you think was left before
> doing a last call?
>
> --
> Joe Hildebrand
>
>
> On 24 Aug 2015, at 22:01, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>
> Some months ago I started the work of editing a revision to the NomCom
>> procedures (RFC7437bis).  We made progress on some points, but seem to
>> have
>> stalled on revising the requirements for qualifying to serve on NomCom.
>>
>> The draft I have recently expired.  Is there any interest in taking
>> another
>> run at this now?  Alternatively, is it worth publishing what we did
>> accomplish, and leaving that one point for a later attempt?
>>
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kucherawy-rfc7437bis/
>>
>> -MSK
>>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email