The nominating committee process (see RFC 3777) has had difficulty in
filling the TSV area director position this year. In particular, the process
was unable to produce a confirmed candidate into the position prior to
the Spring IETF meeting. There has been speculation about how the
process reached this point. I would, therefore, like to provide the
community with what information that I can, subject to the confidentiality
rules that bind the Nomcom. Note that this is not a consensus statement
of the Nomcom, and opinions expressed in this message are my own.
In the selection of area directors, as stated in RFC 3777, the Nomcom
operates with the advice and consent of the IAB, which acts as the
confirming body for IESG positions. Despite the fact that the IAB and the
Nomcom are both working hard to produce an outcome that satisfies the
best interests of the community, the Nomcom has thus far not succeeded
in putting forward a Transport Area Director candidate whom the IAB is
willing to confirm.
As per RFC 3777, the Nomcom receives written requirements from the
IESG, and also talks to members of the community about the needs of the
area and requirements for the position. However, at this point in time, it
is possible that the Nomcom and the IAB lack a common understanding
of the requirements for the Transport Area Director position and the
current needs of the Area.
The Nomcom is watching the discussion on the IETF mailing list and I
appreciate those constructive comments that have been made on the list.
However, if you have specific comments about the position of Transport
Area director or the needs of that area, please do not hesitate to send
comments directly to the Nomcom: nomcom12(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org. The Nomcom
always welcomes comments from the community.
Ultimately, the process is ongoing. I personally remain optimistic that
additional dialog between the Nomcom, the community, the IAB, and the
IESG will allow us to resolve the current situation. The Nomcom will
continue its work until all open positions are filled.
However, one of the challenges to everyone involved in the current
situation is that RFC 3777 provides little guidance in cases such as this.
Namely, where the Nomcom and a confirming body are not able to
produce a confirmed candidate (for some position) prior to the First IETF
meeting of the year.
With regards to the discussion in TSVAREA, the Nomcom was not directly
involved in the decision to have this community discussion in Orlando.
(The Nomcom did recently inform the IESG that the process would not
produce a TSV Area Director in time for Orlando, and had previously
requested and received clarification of the IESG's written requirements
from the IESG.) However, myself and at least several members of the
Nomcom will be present at the TSVAREA session. I believe that the
proposed discussion is constructive and that holding the discussion is
appropriate. I do not know whether the discussion will help resolve the
current situation, though it might. Furthermore, this is not the first year
the nomcom process has had trouble filling the TSV area director
position, and so at the very least, this discussion should begin to pave
the way for a smoother process next year. Therefore, I would encourage
all interested parties to attend.
Finally, I realize that this message contains less detail than some of you
would like. However, at this point in time, I am personally unwilling to
disclose additional details to the community related to interactions
between the Nomcom and the confirming body. Although RFC 3777 is not
precise with regards to what is covered by Nomcom confidentiality, I
would rather err on the side of broad interpretation of Nomcom
confidentiality. I believe this is consistent with the interpretation of past
Nomcoms with regards to interactions with confirming bodies.
Thank you all for your patience in this matter. Please do not hesitate to
contact me personally with any comments or concerns.
- Matt Lepinski
nomcom-chair(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org