Re: question to the IAOC: new committee members

[JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[e-mail]>]

I understand that and the workload increase, but clearly the way to accommodate to it, in a transparent way is to increase the number of seats, which I believe requires a small modification of RFC4071.

I think that “common” as you say is ok, but always with a predefined procedure, clear for all the community. For example:

1) There is some scoring to appoint people depending on their capabilities/merits?
2) Where are the detailed minutes of that decision process, so we can review it?

Regards,
Jordi


-----Mensaje original-----
De: ietf <[e-mail]> en nombre de Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>
Organización: University of Auckland
Responder a: <[e-mail]>
Fecha: jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016, 4:26
Para: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Asunto: Re: question to the IAOC: new committee members

    Jordi,
    
    It's very common for committees to appoint sub-committees, within their
    range of responsibilities, and for sub-committees to coopt experts.
    
    I am not in the least shocked by this; in fact given the expansion of
    the IASA's workload over the last 10 years it seems entirely normal
    to me. I don't think anything has been hidden, and of course the IAOC
    as a whole remains responsible for the work of IASA subcommittees,
    according to section 3.2 of RFC4071. Specifically "The IAOC's mission
    is not to be engaged in the day-to-day administrative work of the IASA,
    but rather to provide appropriate direction, oversight, and approval."
    
    Regards
       Brian
    
    On 16/11/2016 23:38, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
    > All the IETF positions have rules to be selected, nomcom, etc., and there is a great transparency on the process.
    > 
    > However today we discovered that new members have been selected for IAOC committees.
    > 
    > What have been the rules/process for that?
    > 
    > One of the questions that have been discussed several times is the lack of transparency from the IAOC, and clearly here we have a new demonstration of that.
    > 
    > I hope there is a clear statement from IAOC explaining the process.
    > 
    > If that not happens, what is the process to appeal that decision, so I can follow it?
    > 
    > We as a community, in my opinion, can’t keep going with this lack of transparency.
    > 
    > Regards,
    > Jordi
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > **********************************************
    > IPv4 is over
    > Are you ready for the new Internet ?
    > http://www.consulintel.es
    > The IPv6 Company
    > 
    > This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    
    
    



**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.