Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Thu, 02 April 2020 14:10 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 CC5FD3A0F95 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 07:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
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 RLAklyCnkxtK for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 07:09:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D7213A13AC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 07:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48tPzw1T8Wz6GHVb; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 07:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1585836508; bh=nG5fO+m/gICbjj7lbajR/+YP9u4rfrD9x0w7tM9e9cY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=byfSfkDn3BqprTPAz1AYuH1aw79OY+B8+AT0cyarx2N8kcuya1e5FBGHTmlkQxH6Y npnttRJLzl+F+UmVt7tVB7HowX4XFFEOg+CQ2zcCZsAQmCf69rwvql90iXYHRfb+r5 K6suZNVBjGZZRxhfGAYIwG9qn2w/6cLn7qAQHK2M=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48tPzv4bznz6GHH1; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 07:08:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: NomCom eligibility & IETF 107
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <CALaySJ+kFVXrVAkYLaO6MaPqDA29MzXhVFcxG0c6hZcBs-LqnQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVAhfFLYwzqw6Qch3BpuMvqjZPzFJ5o1iTOwR+yqH8j-Aw@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVCzMPGuunYZBCSh90ddY2kKJ_Hqnot0s1jmhNQ7qT0xkg@mail.gmail.com> <89730DD8-0451-4658-A0CD-83A85E2055FE@episteme.net> <0C31D020-46FA-424E-8FFD-64BBE8F952E9@cooperw.in> <1E702B62-9982-48F2-B8D6-F4F80A8DE168@episteme.net> <20200331184236.GT18021@localhost> <CALaySJ+_+-kf+3nta8LwMiwPmqPmRdOgC7KAnDfeDgx0ThVa-w@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJ+27gcT6x5BcKU1YHHv+xeaXDnxPU0yhtBSULb36VpFWA@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVBy7iVT4NVLw14+=a1ksWrg35q+dsKfs+9r2poiVo3wkg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <c2e49395-6bad-48ad-fa13-985f59325d08@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 10:08:27 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVBy7iVT4NVLw14+=a1ksWrg35q+dsKfs+9r2poiVo3wkg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/d8HI_5X540xz-KjYlqK9REzxoXg>
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: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:10:01 -0000

Thank you Barry.  This works for me.
Yours,
Joel

On 4/2/2020 10:03 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> The IESG has listened to the discussion and has reconsidered.  We have
> posted an Internet draft:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iesg-nomcom-eligibility-2020/
> 
> Murray will be the shepherding AD, and will request a four-week last
> call later today, to end on 30 April, the deadline we had set for
> comments.  The following week (7 May) will have an IESG telechat, and
> we would expect to have the document on that telechat agenda for
> approval.
> 
> The substantive bit in the document is as I described in the message below.
> 
> Barry, for the IESG
> 
> On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 3:37 PM Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>>
>> While we are sorting this out, and whether we publish an Internet
>> draft or not, I would like to know this:
>>
>> As I (Barry, not the IESG as a whole) currently read the rough
>> consensus, considering what people have said the reasons you all have
>> given, and the discussion of those reasons, I see things falling
>> toward option 1.  Specifically, looking at RFC 8713, Section 4.14, FOR
>> THIS NOMCOM CYCLE ONLY and SETTING NO PRECEDENT, I would replace the
>> first two paragraphs this way:
>>
>>     Members of the IETF community must have attended at least three of
>>     the last five in-person IETF meetings in order to volunteer.
>>
>>     The five meetings are the five most recent in-person meetings that
>>     ended prior to the date on which the solicitation for NomCom
>>     volunteers was submitted for distribution to the IETF community.
>>     For the 2020-2021 Nominating Committee those five meetings are
>>     IETFs 102, 103, 104, 105, and 106.
>>
>> The question I will ask is this: Is there anyone who *can't live with
>> that outcome*?
>>
>> That question is not asking what you *prefer*; I've read all of those,
>> and I am still collecting that input further.  But for the purpose of
>> this question, does anyone think that outcome is so bad that you can't
>> accept it?  If you can live with it, there's no need to respond.  Just
>> let me know if you can't.
>>
>> Barry
>>