Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]

joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Sun, 15 March 2015 19:46 UTC

Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.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 69A401A1B6D; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 0ITEBzGW899T; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:46:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (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 44EE21A1B77; Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:46:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mb-aye.local ([IPv6:2601:9:3402:7bb1:b4cc:b389:671b:b1b5]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id t2FJjqTY002275 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 15 Mar 2015 19:45:52 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <5505E16F.1060605@bogus.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 12:45:51 -0700
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:36.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/36.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, "Fred Baker (fred)" <fred@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: What is a "management position? [Last Call: <draft-farrresnickel-harassment-05.txt> (IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures) to Best Current Practice]
References: <20150116152211.25947.49086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150117174430.9A0471ACE15@ietfa.amsl.com> <20150306163724.GA32205@verdi> <tsl385im2yp.fsf@mit.edu> <781553AA-EA2C-4057-9888-491C80A780DA@piuha.net> <54FE045D.3080606@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslr3sxep1l.fsf@mit.edu> <54FE6297.4090008@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslzj7i2wid.fsf@mit.edu> <55019E72.4090004@qti.qualcomm.com> <tslfv9a2t6p.fsf@mit.edu> <36671C44-DE53-4AC9-B8EA-465BF97B2FDB@piuha.net> <tsly4n0zo6g.fsf@mit.edu> <550350C4.9040201@qti.qualcomm.com> <5503914A.7060209@gmail.com> <5503BF22.5020902@gmail.com> <2AE2D092-C32A-46EB-88CA-71366965F4D7@cisco.com> <5505D873.1040203@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5505D873.1040203@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nD0fvqSm4TegdwutQRQRHbnN5NvKTlT8H"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fEdr5xg101n5le6x8bomRyIvJAE>
Cc: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, IETF Discussion List <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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 15 Mar 2015 19:46:06 -0000

On 3/15/15 12:07 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 15/03/2015 18:17, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 13, 2015, at 9:54 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Or does it also include people appointed by ADs (WG chairs
>>> and secretaries, Directorate members)?
>>>
>>> This needs to be clarified. And they are two very different cases.
>>
>> Hmm. AFAIK, a WG secretary is appointed by the chair, not the AD, or at least not necessarily the AD. And we could discuss, if we really wanted to descend into the pit of despair, scribes...
> 
> Actually, RFC 2418 leaves it unclear who appoints a WG Secretary. I think
> it's been common for WG Chairs to get an OK from the AD, at least. But your
> point is taken: what needs clarifying is whether the term "management position"
> includes all appointees, as well as positions filled by the NomCom.

The transitive property of chairs serving at the discretion of the AD
makes the question of downstream appointment authority moot.

...
   The Area
   Director must agree to the specific people performing the WG Chair,
   and Working Group Consultant roles, and they serve at the discretion
   of the Area Director.
...

>    Brian
>