I did, and 3 times already.
They only reflect the decision, not the process. IT IS NOT TRANSPARENT.
Committee Member Updates
1. On July 18, 2016 the IAOC Chair announced that the IAOC was interested in
broadening nonmember
participation in its committees and requested those who were interested to
respond
by 1 August.
2. The IAOC received expressions of interest from 9 community members.
Resolution
The IAOC appoints the following community members (+ ex-officio positions) to
the respective
committee based upon their experience and interest, and subject to their
[availability]
willingness to execute a non-disclosure agreement, for the 2016-2017 term:
a. Finance Committee - Michael Richardson
b. Legal Committee - Joel Halpern
c. Meetings Committee - Yang Huaru, Avri Doria
Jari made the motion to approve the new committee members. John seconded the
motion.
Roll Call:
Jari Arkko [YES]
Lou Berger [YES]
Kathy Brown [YES]
Leslie Daigle [YES]
Tobias Gondrom [YES]
John Levine [YES]
Andrew Sullivan [YES]
The motion carries.
Action: We need to follow-up with those who were not selected and announce the
new
members.
Regards,
Jordi
-----Mensaje original-----
De: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob(_at_)sobco(_dot_)com>
Responder a: <sob(_at_)sobco(_dot_)com>
Fecha: jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016, 10:42
Para: <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
CC: IAOC IAOC <iaoc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, IETF discussion list
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Asunto: Re: [IAOC] question to the IAOC: new committee members
Jordi
please take a look at the IAOC minutes for September 8 2016
Scott
> On Nov 16, 2016, at 8:24 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
<jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es> wrote:
>
> Of course, I checked all the minutes, before my first posting on this. I
read them once per month or so.
>
> I check them again right now. I see the case for the legal committee, or
others that may have a single volunteer, which is perfectly fine then, but no
details on the others …
>
> Regards,
> Jordi
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de "Scott O.
Bradner" <sob(_at_)sobco(_dot_)com>
> Responder a: <sob(_at_)sobco(_dot_)com>
> Fecha: jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016, 10:19
> Para: <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>
> CC: IAOC IAOC <iaoc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, IETF discussion list
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
> Asunto: Re: [IAOC] question to the IAOC: new committee members
>
> speaking for the legal committee, we had one volunteer that many of us
know well - there was
> no specific scoring since we knew that the one volunteer would be fine
and he was invited to join the committee.
>
> there was a few minutes discussion on an IAOC call and I assume that
the result was minuted
> but do not recall
>
> Scott
>
>> On Nov 16, 2016, at 8:11 PM, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ
<jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es> wrote:
>>
>> I understand that and the workload increase, but clearly the way to
accommodate to it, in a transparent way is to increase the number of seats,
which I believe requires a small modification of RFC4071.
>>
>> I think that “common” as you say is ok, but always with a predefined
procedure, clear for all the community. For example:
>>
>> 1) There is some scoring to appoint people depending on their
capabilities/merits?
>> 2) Where are the detailed minutes of that decision process, so we can
review it?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jordi
>>
>>
>> -----Mensaje original-----
>> De: ietf <ietf-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org> en nombre de Brian E
Carpenter <brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
>> Organización: University of Auckland
>> Responder a: <brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
>> Fecha: jueves, 17 de noviembre de 2016, 4:26
>> Para: <jordi(_dot_)palet(_at_)consulintel(_dot_)es>,
<ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>, <iaoc(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
>> Asunto: Re: question to the IAOC: new committee members
>>
>> Jordi,
>>
>> It's very common for committees to appoint sub-committees, within their
>> range of responsibilities, and for sub-committees to coopt experts.
>>
>> I am not in the least shocked by this; in fact given the expansion of
>> the IASA's workload over the last 10 years it seems entirely normal
>> to me. I don't think anything has been hidden, and of course the IAOC
>> as a whole remains responsible for the work of IASA subcommittees,
>> according to section 3.2 of RFC4071. Specifically "The IAOC's mission
>> is not to be engaged in the day-to-day administrative work of the IASA,
>> but rather to provide appropriate direction, oversight, and approval."
>>
>> Regards
>> Brian
>>
>> On 16/11/2016 23:38, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ wrote:
>>> All the IETF positions have rules to be selected, nomcom, etc., and
there is a great transparency on the process.
>>>
>>> However today we discovered that new members have been selected for
IAOC committees.
>>>
>>> What have been the rules/process for that?
>>>
>>> One of the questions that have been discussed several times is the lack
of transparency from the IAOC, and clearly here we have a new demonstration of
that.
>>>
>>> I hope there is a clear statement from IAOC explaining the process.
>>>
>>> If that not happens, what is the process to appeal that decision, so I
can follow it?
>>>
>>> We as a community, in my opinion, can’t keep going with this lack of
transparency.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jordi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> **********************************************
>>> IPv4 is over
>>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>>> http://www.consulintel.es
>>> The IPv6 Company
>>>
>>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> **********************************************
>> IPv4 is over
>> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
>> http://www.consulintel.es
>> The IPv6 Company
>>
>> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> **********************************************
> IPv4 is over
> Are you ready for the new Internet ?
> http://www.consulintel.es
> The IPv6 Company
>
> This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.
>
>
>
**********************************************
IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
http://www.consulintel.es
The IPv6 Company
This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or
confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the
individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information, including attached files, is prohibited.