Scott:
I cannot see how the change that you are proposing to the ISOC Bylaws has any
impact on the content of rfc3677bis. What am I missing?
If I am not missing anything, then it seems to me that waiting to move forward
on this is counter to may of the other comments that we got about acting
promptly to keep our document in sync with the current bylaws.
Russ
On Feb 25, 2016, at 7:27 AM, Bradner, Scott <sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu> wrote:
re section 3.5 mid-term vacancies
please hold off on this particular section for a bit - I am in the middle of
proposing some changes
to the ISOC bylaws - mostly to clear up some confusions - and one of these
changes concerns IETF vacancy appointments
the current bylaws do not limit when the IETF can appoint someone to fill a
vacancy but do limit when such an
appointment can take office to the start of the ISOC mid year meeting, when
all new trustees take office - which might
be a bit frustrating to the appointee
I am proposing a bylaws update that will put the IETF appointment t fill a
vacancy to be the same
as it is for the chapters & org members - with until the next appointment
cycle (to do otherwise
provided unequal treatment for the IETF)
in any case some change is needed to clarify the existing situation
Scott
On Feb 24, 2016, at 12:59 PM, IAB Executive Administrative Manager
<execd(_at_)iab(_dot_)org> wrote:
This is an announcement of an IETF-wide Call for Comment on
draft-iab-rfc3677bis-00.
The document is being considered for publication as a Best Current
Practice RFC within the IAB stream, and is available for inspection
here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-rfc3677bis/
The Call for Comment will last until 2016-03-23. Please send comments to
architecture-discuss(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org and iab(_at_)iab(_dot_)org.
Abstract
This memo, which obsoletes RFC3677, outlines the process by which the
IETF makes a selection of an Internet Society (ISOC) Board of
Trustees appointment.