[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Thoughts on the nomcom process

2008-03-16 04:54:03
Hi, Lakshminath,

Once we arrive at consensus conclusions on those, state those and revise
3777 to delete text that is inconsistent with those conclusions.  Unlike
other parts of our process, nomcoms are under hard time constraints and
much of the work happens in secrecy.  We are already late for any
revision to be useful for the next nomcom.

I'm speaking as someone who has filled out NomCom questionnaires in the 
past, multiple times, and someone who never dreamed that I should be looking 
on the IAB website for clues about what information would be shared outside 
the NomCom...

You did something very GOOD this time - you invoked the never-before-invoked 
arbitration process, instead of secretly resolving an "irresistable force 
meets immovable object" dispute. Please accept credit for this good 
judgement, especially if you are assigning blame to yourself.

Obviously, we're not going to revise RFC 3777 before the next NomCom is 
seated. The discussion to date has already identified an improvement that 
doesn't require RFC 3777bis in order to be implemented - clearly divide the 
questionnaire into "this information may be shared with confirming bodies" 
and "this information will not be shared outside NomCom". I think any sane 
incoming NomCom chair would plan to implement that improvement, based on 
this year's experiences, which past NomCom chairs have congratulated you for 
publicizing broadly.

So, I don't think you guys did too badly. ;-)

And thanks for your service to the community.


IETF mailing list