I want to highlight one think in this document. The document says:
There is an existing tool for supporting Nomcom work. The set of
requirements specified in this document are mainly enhancement
requirements or behavior changes to the existing tool. Unless
otherwise stated all of the current functions of the existing Nomcom
tool need to be supported in the new tool as well.
If you have not served on a NomCom since the existing tool was deployed, then
it will be difficult to understand the proposed tool requirements. Is this
acceptable?
Russ
On Jun 13, 2012, at 12:04 PM, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Requirements for IETF Nominations Committee tools'
<draft-krishnan-nomcom-tools-01.txt> as Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2012-07-11. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
This document defines the requirements for a set of tools for use by
the IETF Nominations Committee.
The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-nomcom-tools/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-krishnan-nomcom-tools/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.