Re: [Pesci-discuss] Re: Fw: Last NomCom 2005/06 Call for Volunteers

Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@netlab.nec.de> Tue, 04 October 2005 17:13 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EMqMH-00073X-OF; Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:13:41 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EMqMF-0006xp-Nk for pesci-discuss@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:13:39 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA10703 for <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 13:13:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from smtp0.netlab.nec.de ([195.37.70.40]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EMqUx-0001YL-57 for pesci-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Oct 2005 13:22:40 -0400
Received: from venus.office (europa.netlab.nec.de [10.1.1.25]) by smtp0.netlab.nec.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id F08C9DC40; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:13:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from n-eggert.office ([10.1.1.112]) by venus.office over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:13:26 +0200
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by n-eggert.office (Postfix) with ESMTP id C53372BC306; Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:13:26 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0510041853310.24109@netcore.fi>
References: <103f01c5c8f8$61dd8800$0500a8c0@china.huawei.com> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0510041853310.24109@netcore.fi>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v734)
Message-Id: <326346D4-5082-47C8-8B99-BD229D476695@netlab.nec.de>
From: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@netlab.nec.de>
Subject: Re: [Pesci-discuss] Re: Fw: Last NomCom 2005/06 Call for Volunteers
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 19:13:23 +0200
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.734)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 04 Oct 2005 17:13:26.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[EF1B07C0:01C5C906]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 2ed806e2f53ff1a061ad4f97e00345ac
Cc: PESCI Discuss Mailing List <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: pesci-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Process Evolution Study Committee of the IETF discussion <pesci-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pesci-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0793850429=="
Sender: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org

On Oct 4, 2005, at 18:03, Pekka Savola wrote:
>
> So, my concern here is that current NOMCOM structure seems to  
> encourage participation from big vendors who can promise their  
> employees something to the effect of:
>
> "being able to affect IETF leadership is so important that we'll  
> get you a big bonus and shift off your day-time job if you get  
> chosen -- you must put your name to the hat!"
>
> .. and this seems troublesome.

More than 40% of the last NomCom volunteers (53/123) came from four  
big vendors (low estimate, other people may have used a non-company  
address when volunteering):

[eggert@n-eggert: ~] wget -O- -q http://www.ietf.org/nomcom/ 
msg10.06.04.txt | perl -n -e 's/.*@(.*)>/\1/ and print' | sort -n |  
uniq -c | sort -r
   19 cisco.com
   13 nokia.com
   11 nortelnetworks.com
   10 ericsson.com
    4 lucent.com
    3 siemens.com
    3 juniper.net
    3 alcatel.com
    2 verisign.com
    2 sun.com
    2 samsung.com
    2 mcsr-labs.org
    2 francetelecom.com
    2 alcatel.be
<cut about 100 unique FQDNs to save some space>

The ratio of these four among the final voting members was even  
higher, with 6 out of 10 from these same four vendors:

Alia Atlas <aatlas@avici.com>
Andrew Lange <andrew.lange@alcatel.com>
Chris Liljenstolpe <chris@liljenstolpe.org>
Juha Wiljakka <juha.wiljakka@nokia.com>
Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti@nortelnetworks.com>
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Markus Isomaki <markus.isomaki@nokia.com>
Matt Larson <mlarson@verisign.com>
Russ White <riw@cisco.com>
Stewart Bryant <stbryant@cisco.com>

So it appears possible that due to the relatively small number of  
NomCom volunteers compared to the large number of eligible people,  
the process could be gamed relatively easily. If the volunteer pool  
shrinks more, this is becoming easier still.

To be clear here, I am *not* criticizing the 2004/2005 NomCom people  
or their decisions! I'm merely using the data to illustrate a point:  
if anything, the pool of NomCom volunteers is already too small;  
changes that cause it to shrink are problematic.

Lars
--
Lars Eggert                                     NEC Network Laboratories

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss