Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-kucherawy-rfc3777bis

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Wed, 29 October 2014 15:45 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE3C1A1A45 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:45:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.267
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_I_INVITATION=-2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT=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 EiFeHNwWUqLs for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81C991A19FC for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id w7so2687731lbi.24 for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=rvRHO7FHzmPaUMfjQLk4krpLQ/Qx90tody8X4BR+WzE=; b=S5VnBpkB85/gRjEkPjHiBoh5nw/ZfAEg/2FE0owqf553bd1cKZwht0uKJ69Lhkzu5O ykzp9eBpa9fGbXZkvVhktHqup13pOLlCl2iBv5elEdoU11aOqtmGHGJZP1VCdmQ5WsKT uDM5DaJ/PKkuDFurZbDvZULEFth15RmofEmUAoZRo+9j6cQ07Y1+OvqExn2du4XDoHhj r4FD1BRN8cM/4+y9mZwbWWITpcsG/f/wrf4fwa/xtQQ3QANSxFaUH4CM2so0lSOdVR/o J0zr6Vegl/HDGYASiJFsyW9TZVZu+tMjx9fS5aFB/ud26wjGsEnP6QthNf92KFmMaH6R 57Ew==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.170.131 with SMTP id am3mr3864370lbc.97.1414597476198; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: barryleiba@gmail.com
Received: by 10.152.8.103 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Oct 2014 08:44:36 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAHw9_i++j9p6RNYgHb+Vyh2yDUiCs==8=EStTyCb9Ly7h6EU3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHw9_i++j9p6RNYgHb+Vyh2yDUiCs==8=EStTyCb9Ly7h6EU3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 11:44:36 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: M1-Snx7ho3iRdpngVinVjk7qRVQ
Message-ID: <CALaySJJVd1ZSSZt=Q3MBPr8WAJu7Y+pGF0=QVi-8T7FFq0zU=A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
To: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c36af011b261050691a487
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/secdir/FrdiZ4UzLJxYJv_nMwP0zkobFIM
Cc: "draft-kucherawy-rfc3777bis.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-kucherawy-rfc3777bis.all@tools.ietf.org>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-kucherawy-rfc3777bis
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:45:21 -0000

Thanks for the review, Warren.  You're probably right that the deletion
stuff should be added to an update of 3777, but that isn't this: this is
*purely*'to fold in updates and make a consolidated version, and all other
changes are out of scope for this round.  Murray has volunteered to do a
subsequent update if there's consensus to make other changes... later.

Barry

On Wednesday, October 29, 2014, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:

> Summary: Ready with nits.
>
> Be ye not afraid....
>
> I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
> ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the
> IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the
> security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat
> these comments just like any other last call comments.
>
>
> This document merges in updates and changes to RFC 3777. The Security
> Considerations section seems correct. Having recently suffered through
> a nomcom procedure for another organization, I think there is
> something missing from the security considerations -- discussions on
> deletion of personal information about the candidates after the
> process ends.
> In section 3.6 the document says: "All deliberations and supporting
> information that relates to specific nominees, candidates, and
> confirmed candidates are confidential." - but, nomcom members are
> likely to be exposed to this info, and are likely to have supporting
> info / notes on their laptops. Something like: "At the end of the
> process all nomcom members should delete confidential material that
> they have copies of" or something. There is an archives section in the
> draft, but there is a big difference between an archive and Bob's
> resume on my personal machine.
>
> Other than that I just have a bunch of bikeshed type nits, included
> below (in [O], [P], [R] format).
>
> W
>
>
>
>
> Network Working Group                                  M. Kucherawy, Ed.
> Internet-Draft                                        September 15, 2014
> Obsoletes: 3777, 5078, 5633, 5680, 6859
> (if approved)
> Intended status: BCP
> Expires: March 19, 2015
>
>
>     IAB, IESG, and IAOC Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process:
>            Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees
>                     -01
>
> Abstract
>
>    The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG, and some
>    members of the IAOC, are selected, confirmed, and recalled is
>    specified in this document.  This document is a self-consistent,
>    organized compilation of the process as it was known at the time of
>    publication of [RFC3777], with various updates since that version was
>    published.
>
> Status of This Memo
>
>    This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
>    provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
>
>    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
>    Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
>    working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
>    Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
>
>    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
>    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
>    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
>    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
>
>    This Internet-Draft will expire on March 19, 2015.
>
> Copyright Notice
>
>    Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
>    document authors.  All rights reserved.
>
>    This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
>    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
>    (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
>    publication of this document.  Please review these documents
>    carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 1]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
>    include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
>    the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
>    described in the Simplified BSD License.
>
> Table of Contents
>
>    1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
>    2.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
>    3.  General  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
>      3.1.  Completion Due . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
>      3.2.  Nominating Committee Principal Functions . . . . . . . . .  6
>      3.3.  Positions To Be Reviewed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
>      3.4.  Term Lengths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
>      3.5.  Mid-Term Vacancies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
>      3.6.  Confidentiality  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
>      3.7.  Advice and Consent Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
>      3.8.  Sitting Members  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
>      3.9.  Announcements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
>    4.  Nominating Committee Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
>      4.1.  Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>      4.2.  Term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
>      4.3.  Structure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
>      4.4.  Chair Duties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
>      4.5.  Chair Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
>      4.6.  Temporary Chair  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
>      4.7.  Liaisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
>      4.8.  Liaison Appointment  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
>      4.9.  Advisors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
>      4.10. Past Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
>      4.11. Voting Volunteers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
>      4.12. Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
>      4.13. Open Positions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
>      4.14. Volunteer Qualification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
>      4.15. Not Qualified  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>      4.16. Selection Process  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>      4.17. Announcement of Selection Results  . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
>      4.18. Committee Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
>    5.  Nominating Committee Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
>      5.1.  Discretion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
>      5.2.  Selection Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
>      5.3.  Confirmation Timeline  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
>      5.4.  Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
>      5.5.  Voting Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
>      5.6.  Voting Quorum  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
>      5.7.  Voting Member Recall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
>      5.8.  Chair Recall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
>      5.9.  Deliberations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 2]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>      5.10. Call for Nominees  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
>      5.11. Nominations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
>      5.12. Candidate Selection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
>      5.13. Consent to Nomination  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
>      5.14. Notifying Confirming Bodies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
>      5.15. Confirming Candidates  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
>      5.16. Archives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
>    6.  Dispute Resolution Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
>    7.  Member Recall  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
>      7.1.  Petition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
>      7.2.  Recall Committee Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
>      7.3.  Recall Committee Creation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
>      7.4.  Recall Committee Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
>      7.5.  Recall Committee Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>      7.6.  3/4 Majority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>      7.7.  Position To Be Filled  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>    8.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>    9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>    10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>      10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
>      10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
>    Appendix A.  Changes Since RFC 3777  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
>    Appendix B.  Oral Tradition  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
>    Appendix C.  Nominating Committee Timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
>    Appendix D.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 3]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 1.  Introduction
>
>    This document is a revision of and supercedes BCP 10.  It is in
>    essence a republishing of [RFC3777] and the other RFCs that updated
>
> [O] It is in essence
> [P] It is essentially
>
>    that document into a single specification.  The result is a complete
>    specification of the process by which members of the IAB and IESG,
>    and some members of the IAOC, are selected, confirmed, and recalled
>    as of the date of its approval.
> [O] IAB and IESG [...] IAOC
> [P] Spell out each acronym before use? Can be done here, in Abstract, or
> both.
>
>
>    Section 4 of [RFC4071] provides further details about the IAOC
>    positions that are filled by the nominating committee.
>
>    The following two assumptions continue to be true of this
>    specification:
>
>    1.  The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and Internet Research
>        Steering Group (IRSG) are not a part of the process described
>        here.
>
>    2.  The organization (and re-organization) of the IESG is not a part
>        of the process described here.
>
>    The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of
>
> [O] time frames
> [P] timeframes
>
>    reference.  The time frames assume that the IETF meets three times
>
> [O] time frames
> [P] timeframes
>
>
>
>    per calendar year with approximately equal amounts of time between
>    them.  The meetings are referred to as the First IETF, Second IETF,
>    or Third IETF as needed.
>
> [O] as needed.
> [p] (delete as needed).
>
>    The next section lists the words and phrases commonly used throughout
>    this document with their intended meaning.
>
>    The majority of this document is divided into four major topics as
>    follows:
>
>    General:  This a set of rules and constraints that apply to the
>       selection and confirmation process as a whole.
>
>    Nominating Committee Selection:  This is the process by which the
>       volunteers who will serve on the committee are selected.
>
>    Nominating Committee Operation:  This is the set of principles,
>       rules, and constraints that guide the activities of the nominating
>       committee, including the confirmation process.
>
>    Member Recall:  This is the process by which the behavior of a
>       sitting member of the IAOC, IESG, or IAB may be questioned,
>       perhaps resulting in the removal of the sitting member.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 4]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    A final section describes how this document differs from its
>    predecessor [RFC3777].
>
>    An appendix of useful facts and practices collected from previous
>    nominating committees is also included.
>
> 2.  Definitions
>
>    The following words and phrases are commonly used throughout this
>    document.  They are listed here with their intended meaning for the
>    convenience of the reader.
>
>    candidate:  A nominee who has been selected to be considered for
>       confirmation by a confirming body.
>
>    confirmed candidate:  A candidate that has been reviewed and approved
>       by a confirming body.
>
>    nominating committee term:  The term begins when its members are
>       officially announced, which is expected to be prior to the Third
>       IETF to ensure it is fully operational at the Third IETF.  The
>       term ends at the Third IETF (not three meetings) after the next
>       nominating committee's term begins.
>
>    nominee:  A person who is being or has been considered for one or
>       more open positions of the IESG, IAB, or IAOC.
>
>    sitting member:  A person who is currently serving a term of
>       membership in the IESG, IAB, or ISOC Board of Trustees.
>
> 3.  General
>
>    The following set of rules apply to the process as a whole.  If
>    necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is
>    included.
>
> 3.1.  Completion Due
>
>    The completion of the annual process is due within seven months.
>
>    The completion of the annual process is due one month prior to the
>    Friday of the week before the First IETF.  It is expected to begin at
>    least eight months prior to the Friday of the week before the First
>    IETF.
>
>    The process officially begins with the announcement of the Chair of
>    the committee.  The process officially ends when all confirmed
>    candidates have been announced.
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 5]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    The annual process is comprised of three major components as follows:
>
>    1.  The selection and organization of the nominating committee
>        members.
>
>    2.  The selection of candidates by the nominating committee.
>
>    3.  The confirmation of the candidates.
>
>    There is an additional month set aside between when the annual
>    process is expected to end and the term of the new candidates is to
>    begin.  This time may be used during unusual circumstances to extend
>    the time allocated for any of the components listed above.
>
> 3.2.  Nominating Committee Principal Functions
>
>    The principal functions of the nominating committee are to review
>    each open IESG, IAB, and IAOC position and to nominate either its
>    incumbent or a superior candidate.
>
>    Although there is no term limit for serving in any IESG, IAB, or IAOC
>    position, the nominating committee may use length of service as one
>    of its criteria for evaluating an incumbent.
>
>    The nominating committee does not select the open positions to be
>    reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review.
>
> [O]  The nominating committee does not select the open positions to be
> reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review.
> [P] This paragraph should move up one paragraph, so that is above the
> paragraph beginning "although"
> [R] Consistency/flow; paragraph above will then refer to open positions.
>
>    The nominating committee will be given the title of the positions to
>    be reviewed and a brief summary of the desired expertise of the
>    candidate that is nominated to fill each position.
>
>    Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they wish to be
>    nominated.
>
>    The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it presents
>    its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as indicated below.
>
>    A superior candidate is one who the nominating committee believes
>    would contribute in such a way as to improve or enhance the body to
>    which he or she is nominated.
>
> [O] The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it presents
>
>    its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as indicated below.
>
>    A superior candidate is one who the nominating committee believes
>    would contribute in such a way as to improve or enhance the body to
>    which he or she is nominated.
>
> [P] A superior candidate is one who the nominating committee believes
>
>    would contribute in such a way as to improve or enhance the body to
>    which he or she is nominated.
>
> The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it presents
>
>    its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as indicated below.
>
> [R] Changed the order of these two paragraphs for better flow.
>
> 3.3.  Positions To Be Reviewed
>
>    Approximately one-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB
>    positions, and one IAOC position, is selected to be reviewed each
>    year.
> [O] is selected
> [P] are selected
> [R] grammar; plural are selected
>
>
>    The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately one-
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 6]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    half of each of the IESG and IAB sitting members, and one of the two
>    nominated IAOC positions, each year.  It is recognized that
>    circumstances may exist that will require the nominating committee to
>    review more or less than the usual number of positions, e.g., if the
>    IESG, IAB, or IAOC have re-organized prior to this process and
>    created new positions, if there are an odd number of current
>    positions, or if a member unexpectedly resigns.
>
> 3.4.  Term Lengths
>
>    Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a two year term.
>
>    The intent of this rule is to ensure that members of the IESG, IAB,
>    and IAOC serve the number of years that best facilitates the review
>    of one-half of the members each year.
>
>    The term of a confirmed candidate selected according to the mid-term
>    vacancy rules may be less than two years, as stated elsewhere in this
>    document.
>
>    It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
>    choose one or more of the currently open positions to which it may
>    assign a term of not more than three years in order to ensure the
>    ideal application of this rule in the future.
>
>    It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
>    choose one or more of the currently open positions that share
>    responsibilities with other positions (both those being reviewed and
>    those sitting) to which it may assign a term of not more than three
>    years to ensure that all such members will not be reviewed at the
>    same time.
>
>    All sitting member terms end during the First IETF meeting
>    corresponding to the end of the term for which they were confirmed.
>    All confirmed candidate terms begin during the First IETF meeting
>    corresponding to the beginning of the term for which they were
>    confirmed.
>
>    For confirmed candidates of the IESG the terms begin no later than
>    when the currently sitting members' terms end on the last day of the
>    meeting.  A term may begin or end no sooner than the first day of the
>    meeting and no later than the last day of the meeting as determined
>    by the mutual agreement of the currently sitting member and the
>    confirmed candidate.  A confirmed candidate's term may overlap the
>    sitting member's term during the meeting as determined by their
>    mutual agreement.
>
>    For confirmed candidates of the IAB and IAOC, the terms overlap with
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 7]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    the terms of the sitting members for the entire week of the meeting.
>
>    For candidates confirmed under the mid-term vacancy rules, the term
>    begins as soon as possible after the confirmation.
>
> 3.5.  Mid-Term Vacancies
>
>    Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented here
>    with four qualifications, namely:
>
>    1.  When there is only one official nominating committee, the body
>        with the mid-term vacancy relegates the responsibility to fill
>        the vacancy to it.  If the mid-term vacancy occurs during the
>        period of time that the term of the prior year's nominating
>        committee overlaps with the term of the current year's nominating
>        committee, the body with the mid-term vacancy must relegate the
>        responsibility to fill the vacancy to the prior year's nominating
>        committee.
>
>    2.  If it is the case that the nominating committee is reconvening to
>        fill the mid-term vacancy, then the completion of the candidate
>        selection and confirmation process is due within six weeks, with
>        all other time periods otherwise unspecified prorated
>        accordingly.
>
> [O] If it is the case that the nominating committee
> [P] If the nominating committee
> [R] Wordy
>
>    3.  The confirming body has two weeks from the day it is notified of
>        a candidate to reject the candidate, otherwise the candidate is
>        assumed to have been confirmed.
>
>    4.  The term of the confirmed candidate will be either:
>
>        A.  the remainder of the term of the open position if that
>            remainder is not less than one year; or
>
>        B.  the remainder of the term of the open position plus the next
>            two year term if that remainder is less than one year.
>
>    In both cases a year is the period of time from a First IETF meeting
>    to the next First IETF meeting.
>
> 3.6.  Confidentiality
>
>    All deliberations and supporting information that relates to specific
>    nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are confidential.
>
>    The nominating committee and confirming body members will be exposed
>    to confidential information as a result of their deliberations, their
>    interactions with those they consult, and from those who provide
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 8]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    requested supporting information.  All members and all other
>    participants are expected to handle this information in a manner
>    consistent with its sensitivity.
>
>    It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee
>    members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise the
>    current committee on deliberations and results of the prior
>    committee, as necessary and appropriate.
>
>    The list of nominees willing to be considered for positions under
>    review in the current nominating committee cycle is not confidential.
>    The nominating committee may disclose a list of names of nominees who
>    are willing to be considered for positions under review to the
>    community, in order to obtain feedback from the community on these
>    nominees.
>
>    The list of nominees disclosed for a specific position should contain
>    only the names of nominees who are willing to be considered for the
>    position under review.
>
>    The nominating committee may choose not to include some names in the
>    disclosed list, at their discretion.
>
>    The nominating committee may disclose an updated list, at its
>    discretion.  For example, the nominating committee might disclose an
>    updated list if it identifies errors/omissions in a previously
>    disclosed version of the disclosed list, or if the nominating
>    committee finds it necessary to call for additional nominees, and
>    these nominees indicate a willingness to be considered before the
>    nominating committee has completed its deliberations.
>
>    Nominees may choose to ask people to provide feedback to the
>    nominating committee, but should not encourage any public statements
>    of support.  Nominating committees should consider nominee-encouraged
>    lobbying and campaigning to be unacceptable behavior.
>
>    IETF community members are encouraged to provide feedback on nominees
>    to the nominating committee, but should not post statements of
>    support/non-support for nominees in any public forum.
>
> 3.7.  Advice and Consent Model
>
>    Unless otherwise specified, the advice and consent model is used
>    throughout the process.  This model is characterized as follows.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                 [Page 9]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 3.7.1.  Positions To Be Reviewed
>
>    The IETF Executive Director informs the nominating committee of the
>    IESG, IAB, and IAOC positions to be reviewed.
>
>    The IESG, IAB, and IAOC are responsible for providing summary of the
>    expertise desired of the candidates selected for their respective
>    open positions to the Executive Director.  The summaries are provided
>    to the nominating committee for its consideration.
>
> 3.7.2.  Candidate Selection
>
>    The nominating committee selects candidates based on its
>    understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the qualifications
>    required and advises each confirming body of its respective
>    candidates.
>
> 3.7.3.  Candidate Review
>
>    The confirming bodies review their respective candidates, they may at
>    their discretion communicate with the nominating committee, and then
>    consent to some, all, or none of the candidates.
>
>    The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates.
>
>    The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB candidates.
>
>    The IAOC candidate is reviewed as specified in [RFC4071].
>
>    The confirming bodies conduct their review using all information and
>    any means acceptable to them, including but not limited to the
>    supporting information provided by the nominating committee,
>    information known personally to members of the confirming bodies and
>    shared within the confirming body, the results of interactions within
>    the confirming bodies, and the confirming bodies interpretation of
>    what is in the best interests of the IETF community.
>
>    If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the nominating
>    committee with respect to those open positions is complete.
>
>    If some or none of the candidates submitted to a confirming body are
>    confirmed, the confirming body should communicate with the nominating
>    committee both to explain the reason why all the candidates were not
>    confirmed and to understand the nominating committee's rationale for
>    its candidates.
>
>    The confirming body may reject individual candidates, in which case
>    the nominating committee must select alternate candidates for the
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 10]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    rejected candidates.
>
>    Any additional time required by the nominating committee should not
>    exceed its maximum time allotment.
>
> 3.7.4.  Confirmation
>
>    A confirming body decides whether it confirms each candidate using a
>    confirmation decision rule chosen by the confirming body.
>
>    If a confirming body has no specific confirmation decision rule, then
>    confirming a given candidate should require at least one-half of the
>    confirming body's sitting members to agree to that confirmation.
>
>    The decision may be made by conducting a formal vote, by asserting
>    consensus based on informal exchanges (e.g., email), or by any other
>    mechanism that is used to conduct the normal business of the
>    confirming body.
>
>    Regardless of which decision rule the confirming body uses, any
>    candidate that is not confirmed under that rule is considered to be
>    rejected.
>
>    The confirming body must make its decision within a reasonable time
>    frame.  The results from the confirming body must be reported
>    promptly to the nominating committee.
>
> 3.8.  Sitting Members
>
>    The following rules apply to nominees candidates who are currently
>    sitting members of the IESG, IAB, or IAOC, and who are not sitting in
>    an open position being filled by the nominating committee.
>
>    The confirmation of a candidate to an open position does not
>    automatically create a vacancy in the IESG, IAB, or IAOC position
>    currently occupied by the candidate.  The mid-term vacancy can not
> [O] can not
> [P] cannot
> [R] grammar
>
> exist until, first, the candidate formally resigns from the current
>    position and, second, the body with the vacancy formally decides for
>    itself that it wants the nominating committee to fill the mid-term
>    vacancy according to the rules for a mid-term vacancy documented
>    elsewhere in this document.
>
>    The resignation should be effective as of when the term of the new
>    position begins.  The resignation may remain confidential to the IAB,
>    IAOC, IESG, and nominating committee until the confirmed candidate is
>    announced for the new position.  The process, according to rules set
>    out elsewhere in this document, of filling the seat vacated by the
>    confirmed candidate may begin as soon as the vacancy is publicly
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 11]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    announced.
>
>    Filling a mid-term vacancy is a separate and independent action from
>    the customary action of filling open positions.  In particular, a
>    nominating committee must complete its job with respect to filling
>    the open positions and then separately proceed with the task of
>    filling the mid-term vacancy according to the rules for a mid-term
>    vacancy documented elsewhere in this document.
>
>    However, the following exception is permitted in the case where the
>    candidate for an open position is currently a sitting member of the
>    IAB.  It is consistent with these rules for the announcements of a
>    resignation of a sitting member of the IAB and of the confirmed
>    candidate for the mid-term vacancy created by that sitting member on
>    the IAB to all occur at the same time as long as the actual sequence
>    of events that occurred did so in the following order:
>
>    1.  The nominating committee completes the advice and consent process
>        for the open position being filled by the candidate currently
>        sitting on the IAB.
>
>    2.  The newly confirmed candidate resigns from their current position
>        on the IAB.
>
>    3.  The IAB with the new mid-term vacancy requests that the
>        nominating committee fill the position.
>
>    4.  The Executive Director of the IETF informs the nominating
>        committee of the mid-term vacancy.
>
>    5.  The nominating committee acts on the request to fill the mid-term
>        vacancy.
>
> 3.9.  Announcements
>
>    All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used by
>    the IETF Secretariat for its announcements, including a notice on the
>    IETF web site.
>
>    As of the publication of this document, the current mechanism is an
>    email message to both the "ietf" and the "ietf-announce" mailing
>    lists.
>
> 4.  Nominating Committee Selection
>
>    The following set of rules apply to the creation of the nominating
>    committee and the selection of its members.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 12]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 4.1.  Timeline
>
>    The completion of the process of selecting and organizing the members
>    of the nominating committee is due within three months.
>
>    The completion of the selection and organization process is due at
>    least one month prior to the Third IETF.  This ensures the nominating
>    committee is fully operational and available for interviews and
>    consultation during the Third IETF.
>
> 4.2.  Term
>
>    The term of a nominating committee is expected to be 15 months.
>
>    It is the intent of this rule that the end of a nominating
>    committee's term overlap by approximately three months the beginning
>    of the term of the next nominating committee.
>
>    The term of a nominating committee begins when its members are
>    officially announced.  The term ends at the Third IETF (not three
>    meetings), i.e., the IETF meeting after the next nominating
>    committee's term begins.
>
>    A term is expected to begin at least two months prior to the Third
>    IETF to ensure the nominating committee has at least one month to get
>    organized before preparing for the Third IETF.
>
>    A nominating committee is expected to complete any work-in-progress
>    before it is dissolved at the end of its term.
>
>    During the period of time that the terms of the nominating committees
>    overlap, all mid-term vacancies are to be relegated to the prior
>    year's nominating committee.  The prior year's nominating committee
>    has no other responsibilities during the overlap period.  At all
>    times other than the overlap period there is exactly one official
>    nominating committee and it is responsible for all mid-term
>    vacancies.
> [O] At all times other than the overlap period there is exactly one
> official
> [P] At all times other than the overlap period, there is exactly one
> official
> [R] comma added for readability
>
>    When the prior year's nominating committee is filling a mid-term
>    vacancy during the period of time that the terms overlap, the
>    nominating committees operate independently.  However, some
>    coordination is needed between them.  Since the prior year's Chair is
>    a non-voting advisor to the current nominating committee the
>    coordination is expected to be straightforward.
>
> [O] nominating committee the coordination
> [P] nominating committee, the coordination
> [R] comma added for readability
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 13]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 4.3.  Structure
>
>    The nominating committee comprises at least a Chair, 10 voting
>    volunteers, four liaisons, and an advisor.
> [O] comprises at least
> [P] comprises of at leat
>
>
>    Any committee member may propose the addition of an advisor to
>    participate in some or all of the deliberations of the committee.
>    The addition must be approved by the committee according to its
>    established voting mechanism.  Advisors participate as individuals.
>
>    Any committee member may propose the addition of a liaison from other
>    unrepresented organizations to participate in some or all of the
>    deliberations of the committee.  The addition must be approved by the
>    committee according to its established voting mechanism.  Liaisons
>    participate as representatives of their respective organizations.
>
>    The Chair is selected according to rules stated elsewhere in this
>    document.
>
>    The 10 voting volunteers are selected according to rules stated
>    elsewhere in this document.
>
>    The IESG, IAB, and IAOC liaisons are selected according to rules
>    stated elsewhere in this document.
>
>    The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a liaison to the
>    nominating committee at its own discretion.
>
>    The Chair of last year's nominating committee serves as an advisor
>    according to rules stated elsewhere in this document.
>
>    None of the Chair, liaisons, or advisors vote on the selection of
>    candidates.  They do vote on all other issues before the committee
>    unless otherwise specified in this document.
>
> 4.4.  Chair Duties
>
>    The Chair of the nominating committee is responsible for ensuring the
>    nominating committee completes its assigned duties in a timely
>    fashion and performs in the best interests of the IETF community.
>
>    The Chair must be thoroughly familiar with the rules and guidance
>    indicated throughout this document.  The Chair must ensure the
>    nominating committee completes its assigned duties in a manner that
>    is consistent with this document.
>
>    The Chair must attest by proclamation at a plenary session of the
>    First IETF that the results of the committee represent its best
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 14]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    effort and the best interests of the IETF community.
>
>    The Chair does not vote on the selection of candidates.
>
> 4.5.  Chair Selection
>
>    The Internet Society President appoints the Chair, who must meet the
>    same requirements for membership in the nominating committee as a
>    voting volunteer.
>
>    The nominating committee Chair must agree to invest the time
>    necessary to ensure that the nominating committee completes its
>    assigned duties and to perform in the best interests of the IETF
>    community in that role.
>
>    The appointment is due no later than the Second IETF meeting to
>    ensure it can be announced during a plenary session at that meeting.
>    The completion of the appointment is necessary to ensure the annual
>    process can complete at the time specified elsewhere in this
>    document.
>
> 4.6.  Temporary Chair
>
>    A Chair, in consultation with the Internet Society President, may
>    appoint a temporary substitute for the Chair position.
>
>    There are a variety of ordinary circumstances that may arise from
>    time to time that could result in a Chair being unavailable to
>    oversee the activities of the committee.  The Chair, in consultation
>    with the Internet Society President, may appoint a substitute from a
>    pool comprised of the liaisons currently serving on the committee and
>    the prior year's Chair or designee.
>
>    Any such appointment must be temporary and does not absolve the Chair
>    of any or all responsibility for ensuring the nominating committee
>    completes its assigned duties in a timely fashion.
>
> 4.7.  Liaisons
>
>    Liaisons are responsible for ensuring the nominating committee in
>    general and the Chair in particular execute their assigned duties in
>    the best interests of the IETF community.
>
>    Liaisons are expected to represent the views of their respective
>    organizations during the deliberations of the committee.  They should
>    provide information as requested or when they believe it would be
>    helpful to the committee.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 15]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    Liaisons from the IESG, IAB, and IAOC are expected to provide
>    information to the nominating committee regarding the operation,
>    responsibility, and composition of their respective bodies.
>
>    Liaisons are expected to convey questions from the committee to their
>    respective organizations and responses to those questions to the
>    committee, as requested by the committee.
>
>    Liaisons from the IESG, IAB, IAOC, and Internet Society Board of
>    Trustees (if one was appointed) are expected to review the operation
>    and executing process of the nominating committee and to report any
>    concerns or issues to the Chair of the nominating committee
>    immediately.  If they can not resolve the issue between themselves,
>    liaisons must report it according to the dispute resolution process
>    stated elsewhere in this document.
>
> [O] can not
> [P] cannot
>
>
>
>
>    Liaisons from confirming bodies are expected to assist the committee
>    in preparing the testimony it is required to provide with its
>    candidates.
>
>    Liaisons may have other nominating committee responsibilities as
>    required by their respective organizations or requested by the
>    nominating committee, except that such responsibilities may not
>    conflict with any other provisions of this document.
>
>    Liaisons do not vote on the selection of candidates.
>
> 4.8.  Liaison Appointment
>
>    The sitting IAOC, IAB, and IESG members each appoint a liaison from
>    their current membership, someone who is not sitting in an open
>    position, to serve on the nominating committee.
>
> 4.9.  Advisors
>
>    An advisor is responsible for such duties as specified by the
>    invitation that resulted in the appointment.
>
>    Advisors do not vote on the selection of candidates.
>
> 4.10.  Past Chair
>
>    The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as an
>    advisor to the current committee.
>
>    The prior year's Chair is expected to review the actions and
>    activities of the current Chair and to report any concerns or issues
>    to the nominating committee Chair immediately.  If they can not
> [O] can not
> [O] cannot
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 16]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    resolve the issue between themselves, the prior year's Chair must
>    report it according to the dispute resolution process stated
>    elsewhere in this document.
>
>    The prior year's Chair may select a designee from a pool composed of
>    the voting volunteers of the prior year's committee and all prior
>    Chairs if the Chair is unavailable.  If the prior year's Chair is
>    unavailable or is unable or unwilling to make such a designation in a
>    timely fashion, the Chair of the current year's committee may select
>    a designee in consultation with the Internet Society President.
>
>    Selecting a prior year's committee member as the designee permits the
>    experience of the prior year's deliberations to be readily available
>    to the current committee.  Selecting an earlier prior year Chair as
>    the designee permits the experience of being a Chair as well as that
>    Chair's committee deliberations to be readily available to the
>    current committee.
>
>    All references to "prior year's Chair" in this document refer to the
>    person serving in that role, whether it is the actual prior year's
>    Chair or a designee.
>
> 4.11.  Voting Volunteers
>
>    Voting volunteers are responsible for completing the tasks of the
>    nominating committee in a timely fashion.
>
>    Each voting volunteer is expected to participate in all activities of
>    the nominating committee with a level of effort approximately equal
>    to all other voting volunteers.  Specific tasks to be completed are
>    established and managed by the Chair according to rules stated
>    elsewhere in this document.
>
> 4.12.  Milestones
>
>    The Chair must establish and announce milestones for the selection of
>    the nominating committee members.
>
>    There is a defined time period during which the selection process is
>    due to be completed.  The Chair must establish a set of milestones
>    which, if met in a timely fashion, will result in the completion of
>    the process on time.
>
> 4.13.  Open Positions
>
>    The Chair (or the IETF Executive Director, if no Chair has been named
>    four weeks after the first IETF meeting of the year) obtains the list
>    of positions to be reviewed and announces it along with a
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 17]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    solicitation for names of volunteers from the IETF community willing
>    to serve on the nominating committee.
>
>    If the IETF Executive Director issues the solicitation for
>    volunteers, the IETF Executive Director must also collect responses
>    to the solicitation and provide the names of volunteers to the
>    incoming nominating committee Chair when the incoming nominating
>    committee Chair is named.
>
>    At the Chair's request, the IETF Secretariat may perform other
>    clerical support tasks, as long as the task being performed does not
>    require nominating committee Chair judgment, in the nominating
>    committee Chair's opinion, and as long as the community is
>    appropriately notified that this request is being made.  This request
>    may come from the incoming nominating committee Chair (if one has
>    been selected for this nominating committee cycle) or the previous
>    nominating committee Chair (if the search for an incoming nominating
>    committee Chair is still underway).
>
>    The solicitation must permit the community at least 30 days during
>    which they may choose to volunteer to be selected for the nominating
>    committee.
>
>    The list of open positions is published with the solicitation to
>    facilitate community members choosing between volunteering for an
>    open position and volunteering for the nominating committee.
>
> 4.14.  Volunteer Qualification
>
>    Members of the IETF community must have attended at least three of
>    the last five IETF meetings in order to volunteer.
>
>    The five meetings are the five most recent meetings that ended prior
>    to the date on which the solicitation for nominating committee
>    volunteers was submitted for distribution to the IETF community.
>
>    The IETF Secretariat is responsible for confirming that volunteers
>    have met the attendance requirement.
>
>    Volunteers must provide their full name, email address, and primary
>    company or organization affiliation (if any) when volunteering.
>
>    Volunteers are expected to be familiar with the IETF processes and
>    procedures, which are readily learned by active participation in a
>    working group and especially by serving as a document editor or
>    working group chair.
>
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 18]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 4.15.  Not Qualified
>
>    Any person who serves on any of the Internet Society Board of
>    Trustees, the IAB, the IESG, or the IAOC, including those who serve
>    on these bodies in ex officio positions, may not volunteer to serve
>    as voting members of the nominating committee.  Liaisons to these
>    bodies from other bodies or organizations are not excluded by this
>    rule.
>
> 4.16.  Selection Process
>
>    The Chair announces both the list of the pool of volunteers from
>    which the 10 voting volunteers will be randomly selected and the
>    method with which the selection will be completed.
>
>    The announcement should be made at least one week prior to the date
>    on which the random selection will occur.
>
>    The pool of volunteers must be enumerated or otherwise indicated
>    according to the needs of the selection method to be used.
>
>    The announcement must specify the data that will be used as input to
>    the selection method.  The method must depend on random data whose
>    value is not known or available until the date on which the random
>    selection will occur.
>
>    It must be possible to independently verify that the selection method
>    used is both fair and unbiased.  A method is fair if each eligible
>    volunteer is equally likely to be selected.  A method is unbiased if
>    no one can influence its outcome in favor of a specific outcome.
>
>    It must be possible to repeat the selection method, either through
>    iteration or by restarting in such a way as to remain fair and
>    unbiased.  This is necessary to replace selected volunteers should
>    they become unavailable after selection.
>
>    The selection method must produce an ordered list of volunteers.
>
>    One possible selection method is described in [RFC3797].
>
> 4.17.  Announcement of Selection Results
>
>    The Chair randomly selects the 10 voting volunteers from the pool of
>    names of volunteers and announces the members of the nominating
>    committee.
>
>    No more than two volunteers with the same primary affiliation may be
>    selected for the nominating committee.  The Chair reviews the primary
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 19]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    affiliation of each volunteer selected by the method in turn.  If the
>    primary affiliation for a volunteer is the same as two previously
>    selected volunteers, that volunteer is removed from consideration and
>    the method is repeated to identify the next eligible volunteer.
>
>    There must be at least two announcements of all members of the
>    nominating committee.
>
>    The first announcement should occur as soon after the random
>    selection as is reasonable for the Chair.  The community must have at
>    least one week during which any member may challenge the results of
>    the random selection.
>
>    The challenge must be made in writing (email is acceptable) to the
>    Chair.  The Chair has 48 hours to review the challenge and offer a
>    resolution to the member.  If the resolution is not accepted by the
>    member, that member may report the challenge according to the dispute
>    resolution process stated elsewhere in this document.
>
>    If a selected volunteer, upon reading the announcement with the list
>    of selected volunteers, finds that two or more other volunteers have
>    the same affiliation, then the volunteer should notify the Chair who
>    will determine the appropriate action.
>
>    During at least the one week challenge period the Chair must contact
>    each of the members and confirm their willingness and availability to
>    serve.  The Chair should make every reasonable effort to contact each
>    member.
>
> [O] challenge period the Chair
> [P] challenge period, the Chair
> [R] readability
>
>    o  If the Chair is unable to contact a liaison the problem is
>       referred to the respective organization to resolve.  The Chair
>       should allow a reasonable amount of time for the organization to
>       resolve the problem and then may proceed without the liaison.
>
> [O] liaison the problem
> [P] liaison, the problem
> [R] readability
>
>
>    o  If the Chair is unable to contact an advisor the Chair may elect
>       to proceed without the advisor, except for the prior year's Chair
>       for whom the Chair must consult with the Internet Society
>       President as stated elsewhere in this document.
> [O] an advisor the Chair
> [P] an advisor, the Chair
> [R] readability
>
>
>    o  If the Chair is unable to contact a voting volunteer the Chair
>       must repeat the random selection process in order to replace the
>       unavailable volunteer.  There should be at least one day between
>       the announcement of the iteration and the selection process.
>
> [O] volunteer the Chair
> [P] volunteer, the Chair
> [R] readability
>
>
>    After at least one week and confirming that 10 voting volunteers are
>    ready to serve, the Chair makes the second announcement of the
>    members of the nominating committee, which officially begins the term
>    of the nominating committee.
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 20]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 4.18.  Committee Organization
>
>    The Chair works with the members of the committee to organize itself
>    in preparation for completing its assigned duties.
>
>    The committee has approximately one month during which it can self-
>    organize.  Its responsibilities during this time include but are not
>    limited to the following:
>
>    o  Setting up a regular teleconference schedule.
>
>    o  Setting up an internal web site.
>
>    o  Setting up a mailing list for internal discussions.
>
>    o  Setting up an email address for receiving community input.
>
>    o  Establishing operational procedures.
>
>    o  Establishing milestones in order to monitor the progress of the
>       selection process.
>
> 5.  Nominating Committee Operation
>
>    The following rules apply to the operation of the nominating
>    committee.  If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation
>    of each rule is included.
>
>    The rules are organized approximately in the order in which they
>    would be invoked.
>
> 5.1.  Discretion
>
>    All rules and special circumstances not otherwise specified are at
>    the discretion of the committee.
>
>    Exceptional circumstances will occasionally arise during the normal
>    operation of the nominating committee.  This rule is intended to
>    foster the continued forward progress of the committee.
>
>    Any member of the committee may propose a rule for adoption by the
>    committee.  The rule must be approved by the committee according to
>    its established voting mechanism.
>
>    All members of the committee should consider whether the exception is
>    worthy of mention in the next revision of this document and follow-up
>    accordingly.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 21]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 5.2.  Selection Timeline
>
>    The completion of the process of selecting candidates to be confirmed
>    by their respective confirming body is due within three months.
>
>    The completion of the selection process is due at least two month's
>
> [O] two month's
> [P] two months
> [R] plural, not possessive
>
>    prior to the First IETF.  This ensures the nominating committee has
>    sufficient time to complete the confirmation process.
>
> 5.3.  Confirmation Timeline
>
>    The completion of the process of confirming the candidates is due
>    within one month.
>
>    The completion of the confirmation process is due at least one month
>    prior to the First IETF.
>
> 5.4.  Milestones
>
>    The Chair must establish for the nominating committee a set of
>    milestones for the candidate selection and confirmation process.
>
>    There is a defined time period during which the candidate selection
>    and confirmation process must be completed.  The Chair must establish
>    a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion, will result in
>    the completion of the process on time.  The Chair should allow time
>    for iterating the activities of the committee if one or more
>    candidates is not confirmed.
>
>    The Chair should ensure that all committee members are aware of the
>    milestones.
>
> 5.5.  Voting Mechanism
>
>    The Chair must establish a voting mechanism.
>
>    The committee must be able to objectively determine when a decision
>    has been made during its deliberations.  The criteria for determining
>    closure must be established and known to all members of the
>    nominating committee.
>
> 5.6.  Voting Quorum
>
>    At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a vote.
>
>    Only voting volunteers vote on a candidate selection.  For a
>    candidate selection vote a quorum is comprised of at least seven of
>    the voting volunteers.
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 22]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    At all other times a quorum is present if at least 75% of the
>    nominating committee members are participating.
>
> 5.7.  Voting Member Recall
>
>    Any member of the nominating committee may propose to the committee
>    that any other member except the Chair be recalled.  The process for
>    recalling the Chair is defined elsewhere in this document.
>
>    There are a variety of ordinary circumstances that may arise that
>    could result in one or more members of the committee being
>    unavailable to complete their assigned duties, for example health
>    concerns, family issues, or a change of priorities at work.  A
>    committee member may choose to resign for unspecified personal
>    reasons.  In addition, the committee may not function well as a group
>    because a member may be disruptive or otherwise uncooperative.
>
>    Regardless of the circumstances, if individual committee members can
>    not work out their differences between themselves, the entire
>    committee may be called upon to discuss and review the circumstances.
>    If a resolution is not forthcoming a vote may be conducted.  A member
>    may be recalled if at least a quorum of all committee members agree,
>    including the vote of the member being recalled.
>
> [O] forthcoming a vote
> [P] forthcoming, a vote
> [R] Grammar
>
>
>    If a liaison member is recalled the committee must notify the
>    affected organization and must allow a reasonable amount of time for
> [O] recalled the committee
> [P] recalled, the committee
> [R] Grammar
>
>    If an advisor member other than the prior year's Chair is recalled,
>    the committee may choose to proceed without the advisor.  In the case
>    of the prior year's Chair, the Internet Society President must be
>    notified and the current Chair must be allowed a reasonable amount of
>    time to consult with the Internet Society President to identify a
>    replacement before proceeding.
>
>    If a single voting volunteer position on the nominating committee is
>    vacated, regardless of the circumstances, the committee may choose to
>    proceed with only nine voting volunteers at its own discretion.  In
>    all other cases a new voting member must be selected, and the Chair
>    must repeat the random selection process including an announcement of
>    the iteration prior to the actual selection as stated elsewhere in
>    this document.
>
>    A change in the primary affiliation of a voting volunteer during the
>    term of the nominating committee is not a cause to request the recall
>    of that volunteer, even if the change would result in more than two
>    voting volunteers with the same affiliation.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 23]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 5.8.  Chair Recall
>
>    Only the prior year's Chair may request the recall of the current
>    Chair.
>
>    It is the responsibility of the prior year's Chair to ensure the
>    current Chair completes the assigned tasks in a manner consistent
>    with this document and in the best interests of the IETF community.
>
>    Any member of the committee who has an issue or concern regarding the
>    Chair should report it to the prior year's Chair immediately.  The
>    prior year's Chair is expected to report it to the Chair immediately.
>    If they can not resolve the issue between themselves, the prior
>    year's Chair must report it according to the dispute resolution
>    process stated elsewhere in this document.
> [O] can not
> [P] cannot
>
> 5.9.  Deliberations
>
>    All members of the nominating committee may participate in all
>    deliberations.
>
>    The emphasis of this rule is that no member can be explicitly
>    excluded from any deliberation.  However, a member may individually
>    choose not to participate in a deliberation.
>
> 5.10.  Call for Nominees
>
>    The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed, the desired
>    expertise provided by the IETF Executive Director, and the call for
>    nominees.
>
>    The call for nominees must include a request for comments regarding
>    the past performance of incumbents, which will be considered during
>    the deliberations of the nominating committee.
>
>    The call must request that a nomination include a valid, working
>    email address, a telephone number, or both for the nominee.  The
>    nomination must include the set of skills or expertise the nominator
>    believes the nominee has that would be desirable.
>
> 5.11.  Nominations
>
>    Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of the IETF
>    community for any open position, whose eligibility to serve will be
>    confirmed by the nominating committee.
>
>    A self-nomination is permitted.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 24]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    Nominating committee members are not eligible to be considered for
>    filling any open position by the nominating committee on which they
>    serve.  They become ineligible as soon as the term of the nominating
>    committee on which they serve officially begins.  They remain
>    ineligible for the duration of that nominating committee's term.
>
>    Although each nominating committee's term overlaps with the following
>    nominating committee's term, nominating committee members are
>    eligible for nomination by the following committee if not otherwise
>    disqualified.
>
>    Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG, IAB,
>    or IAOC position during the previous two years are not eligible to be
>    considered for filling any open position.
>
> 5.12.  Candidate Selection
>
>    The nominating committee selects candidates based on its
>    understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the qualifications
>    required to fill the open positions.
>
>    The intent of this rule is to ensure that the nominating committee
>    consults with a broad base of the IETF community for input to its
>    deliberations.  In particular, the nominating committee must
>    determine if the desired expertise for the open positions matches its
>    understanding of the qualifications desired by the IETF community.
>
>    The consultations are permitted to include names of nominees, if all
>    parties to the consultation agree to observe the same confidentiality
>    rules as the nominating committee itself, or the names are public as
>    discussed in Section 3.6.  Feedback on individual nominees should
>    always be confidential.
>
>    A broad base of the community should include the existing members of
>    the IAB, IAOC, and IESG, especially sitting members who share
>    responsibilities with open positions, e.g., co-Area Directors, and
>    working group chairs, especially those in the areas with open
>    positions.
>
>    Only voting volunteer members vote to select candidates.
>
> 5.13.  Consent to Nomination
>
>    Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and must
>    consent to their nomination prior to being chosen as candidates.
>
>    Although the nominating committee will make every reasonable effort
>    to contact and to remain in contact with nominees, any nominee whose
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 25]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    contact information changes during the process and who wishes to
>    still be considered should inform the nominating committee of the
>    changes.
>
>    A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and must
>    include a commitment to provide the resources necessary to fill the
>    open position and an assurance that the nominee will perform the
>    duties of the position for which they are being considered in the
>    best interests of the IETF community.
>
>    Consenting to a nomination must occur prior to a nominee being a
>    candidate and may occur as soon after the nomination as needed by the
>    nominating committee.
>
>    Consenting to a nomination must not imply the nominee will be a
>    candidate.
>
>    The nominating committee should help nominees provide justification
>    to their employers.
>
> 5.14.  Notifying Confirming Bodies
>
>    The nominating committee advises the confirming bodies of their
>    candidates, specifying a single candidate for each open position and
>    testifying as to how each candidate meets the qualifications of an
>    open position.
>
>    For each candidate, the testimony must include a brief statement of
>    the qualifications for the position that is being filled, which may
>    be exactly the expertise that was requested.  If the qualifications
>    differ from the expertise originally requested a brief statement
>    explaining the difference must be included.
> [O] requested a brief
> [P] requested, a brief
> [R] grammar
>
>    The testimony may include either or both of a brief resume of the
>    candidate and a brief summary of the deliberations of the nominating
>    committee.
>
> 5.15.  Confirming Candidates
>
>    Confirmed candidates must consent to their confirmation and rejected
>    candidates and nominees must be notified before confirmed candidates
>    are announced.
>
>    It is not necessary to notify and get consent from all confirmed
>    candidates together.
>
>    A nominee may not know they were a candidate.  This permits a
>    candidate to be rejected by a confirming body without the nominee
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 26]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    knowing about the rejection.
>
>    Rejected nominees, who consented to their nomination, and rejected
>    candidates must be notified prior to announcing the confirmed
>    candidates.
>
>    It is not necessary to announce all confirmed candidates together.
>
>    The nominating committee must ensure that all confirmed candidates
>    are prepared to serve prior to announcing their confirmation.
>
> 5.16.  Archives
>
>    The nominating committee should archive the information it has
>    collected or produced for a period of time not to exceed its term.
>
>    The purpose of the archive is to assist the nominating committee
>    should it be necessary for it to fill a mid-term vacancy.
>
>    The existence of an archive, how it is implemented, and what
>    information to archive is at the discretion of the committee.  The
>    decision must be approved by a quorum of the voting volunteer
>    members.
>
>    The implementation of the archive should make every reasonable effort
>    to ensure that the confidentiality of the information it contains is
>    maintained.
>
> 6.  Dispute Resolution Process
>
>    The dispute resolution process described here is to be used as
>    indicated elsewhere in this document.  Its applicability in other
>    circumstances is beyond the scope of this document.
>
>    The nominating committee operates under a strict rule of
>    confidentiality.  For this reason when process issues arise it is
>    best to make every reasonable effort to resolve them within the
>    committee.  However, when circumstances do not permit this or no
>    resolution is forthcoming, the process described here is to be used.
> [O] arise it is
> [P] arise, it is
> [R] grammar
>
>
>    The following rules apply to the process.
>
>    1.  The results of this process are final and binding.  There is no
>        appeal.
>
>    2.  The process begins with the submission of a request as described
>        below to the Internet Society President.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 27]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    3.  As soon as the process begins, the nominating committee may
>        continue those activities that are unrelated to the issue to be
>        resolved except that it must not submit any candidates to a
>        confirming body until the issue is resolved.
>
>    4.  All parties to the process are subject to the same
>        confidentiality rules as each member of the nominating committee.
>
>    5.  The process should be completed within two weeks.
>
>    The process is as follows:
>
>    1.  The party seeking resolution submits a written request (email is
>        acceptable) to the Internet Society President detailing the issue
>        to be resolved.
>
>    2.  The Internet Society President appoints an arbiter to investigate
>        and resolve the issue.  A self-appointment is permitted.
>
>    3.  The arbiter investigates the issue making every reasonable effort
>        to understand both sides of the issue.  Since the arbiter is
>        subject to the same confidentiality obligations as all nominating
>        committee members, all members are expected to cooperate fully
>        with the arbiter and to provide all relevant information to the
>        arbiter for review.
>
>    4.  After consultation with the two principal parties to the issue,
>        the arbiter decides on a resolution.  Whatever actions are
>        necessary to execute the resolution are immediately begun and
>        completed as quickly as possible.
>
>    5.  The arbiter summarizes the issue, the resolution, and the
>        rationale for the resolution for the Internet Society President.
>
>    6.  In consultation with the Internet Society President, the arbiter
>        prepares a report of the dispute and its resolution.  The report
>        should include all information that in the judgment of the
>        arbiter does not violate the confidentiality requirements of the
>        nominating committee.
>
> [O] that in the judgment of the arbiter does
> [P] that, in the judgement of the arbiter, does
> [R] readability
>
>    7.  The Chair includes the dispute report when reporting on the
>        activities of the nominating committee to the IETF community.
>
> 7.  Member Recall
>
>    The following rules apply to the recall process.  If necessary, a
>    paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included.
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 28]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 7.1.  Petition
>
>    At any time, at least 20 members of the IETF community, who are
>    qualified to be voting members of a nominating committee, may request
>    by signed petition (email is acceptable) to the Internet Society
>    President the recall of any sitting IAB, IAOC, or IESG member.
> [O] President
> [P] President,
> [R] missing close comma on parenthetical phrase
>
>
>    All individual and collective qualifications of nominating committee
>    eligibility are applicable, including that no more than two
>    signatories may have the same primary affiliation.
>
>    Each signature must include a full name, email address, and primary
>    company or organization affiliation.
>
>    The IETF Secretariat is responsible for confirming that each
>    signatory is qualified to be a voting member of a nominating
>    committee.  A valid petition must be signed by at least 20 qualified
>    signatories.
>
>    The petition must include a statement of justification for the recall
>    and all relevant and appropriate supporting documentation.
>
>    The petition and its signatories must be announced to the IETF
>    community.
>
> 7.2.  Recall Committee Chair
>
>    Internet Society President shall appoint a Recall Committee Chair.
>
>    The Internet Society President must not evaluate the recall request.
>    It is explicitly the responsibility of the IETF community to evaluate
>    the behavior of its leaders.
>
> 7.3.  Recall Committee Creation
>
>    The recall committee is created according to the same rules as is the
>    nominating committee with the qualifications that both the person
>    being investigated and the parties requesting the recall must not be
>    a member of the recall committee in any capacity.
> [O] as is the
> [P] as the
> [R] readability
>
>
> 7.4.  Recall Committee Rules
>
>    The recall committee operates according to the same rules as the
>    nominating committee with the qualification that there is no
>    confirmation process.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 29]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
> 7.5.  Recall Committee Operation
>
>    The recall committee investigates the circumstances of the
>    justification for the recall and votes on its findings.
>
>    The investigation must include at least both an opportunity for the
>    member being recalled to present a written statement and consultation
>    with third parties.
>
> 7.6.  3/4 Majority
>
>    A 3/4 majority of the members who vote on the question is required
>    for a recall.
>
> 7.7.  Position To Be Filled
>
>    If a sitting member is recalled the open position is to be filled
>    according to the mid-term vacancy rules.
> [O] is recalled the open position
> [P] is recalled, the open position
> [R] readability
>
>
> 8.  IANA Considerations
>
>    This document contains no actions for IANA.
>
>    [RFC Editor: Please remove this section prior to publication.]
>
> 9.  Security Considerations
>
>    Any selection, confirmation, or recall process necessarily involves
>    investigation into the qualifications and activities of prospective
>    candidates.  The investigation may reveal confidential or otherwise
>    private information about candidates to those participating in the
>    process.  Each person who participates in any aspect of the process
>    must maintain the confidentiality of any and all information not
>    explicitly identified as suitable for public dissemination.
>
>    When the nominating committee decides it is necessary to share
>    confidential or otherwise private information with others, the
>    dissemination must be minimal and must include a prior commitment
>    from all persons consulted to observe the same confidentiality rules
>    as the nominating committee itself.
>
> 10.  References
>
> 10.1.  Normative References
>
>    [RFC3777]  Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and
>               Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall
>               Committees", BCP 10, RFC 3777, June 2004.
>
>
>
> Kucherawy                Expires March 19, 2015                [Page 30]
>
> Internet-Draft                   NomCom                   September 2014
>
>
>    [RFC4071]  Austein, R. and B. Wijnen, "Structure of the IETF
>               Administrative Support Activity (IASA)", BCP 101,
>               RFC 4071, April 2005.
>
> 10.2.  Informative References
>
>    [RFC3797]  Eastlake, D., "Publicly Verifiable Nominations Committee
>               (NomCom) Random Selection", RFC 3797, June 2004.
>
> Appendix A.  Changes Since RFC 3777
>
>    o  Converted from nroff to xml2rfc, resulting in some reformatting.
>
>    o  Applied RFC 3777 errata.
>
>    o  Applied RFC 5078 update.
>
>    o  Applied RFC 5633 update.
>
>    o  Applied RFC 5680 update.
>
>    o  Applied RFC 6859 update.
>
>    o  A few grammatical corrections.
>
> Appendix B.  Oral Tradition
>
>    Over the years various nominating committees have learned through
>    oral tradition passed on by liaisons that there are certain
>    consistencies in the process and information considered during
>    deliberations.  Some items from that oral tradition are collected
>    here to facilitate its consideration by future nominating committees.
>
>    1.  It has been found that experience as an IETF Working Group Chair
>        or an IRTF Research Group Chair is helpful in giving a nominee
>        experie
>
> --
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>    ---maf
>