Network Working Group J. Galvin Internet-Draft eList eXpress LLC Expires: December 21, 2002 June 22, 2002 IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees draft-ietf-nomcom-rfc2727bis-00.txt Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http:// www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 21, 2002. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. Abstract The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled is specified. This document is a self- consistent, organized compilation of the process as it was known at the time of publication. Discussion of this Draft Please direct all comments, suggestions, and questions regarding this draft to the following mailing list: ietf-nomcom@lists.elistx.com Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 1] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 To subscribe to that mailing list you may send a message with the single word "subscribe" in the body to: ietf-nomcom-request@lists.elistx.com Or you may visit the web-based subscription manager at: Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Nominating Committee Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Nominating Committee Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. Member Recall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6. Changes From RFC2727 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A. Oral Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 2] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 1. Introduction This document is a revision of and supercedes RFC2727. [2] It is a complete specification of the process by which members of the IAB and IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled as of the date of its approval. However, these procedures are subject to change and such change takes effect immediately upon its approval, regardless of whether this document has yet been revised. The following two assumptions continue to be true of this specification. 1. The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG) are not a part of the process described here. 2. The organization (and re-organization) of the IESG is not a part of the process described here. The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of reference. The time frames assume that the IETF meets three times per calendar year with approximately equal amounts of time between them. The meetings are referred to as the First IETF, Second IETF, or Third IETF as needed. A sitting member of either the IAB or IESG is a person who is currently serving a term of membership in that committee. The remainder of this document is divided into four major topics as follows. General: This a set of rules and constraints that apply to the selection and confirmation process as a whole. Nominating Committee Selection: This is the process by which volunteers from the IETF community are recognized to serve on the committee that nominates candidates to serve on the IESG and IAB. Nominating Committee Operation: This is the set of principles, rules, and constraints that guide the activities of the nominating committee, including the confirmation process. Member Recall: This is the process by which the behavior of a sitting member of the IESG or IAB may be questioned, perhaps resulting in the removal of the sitting member. A final section describes how this document differs from its predecessor: RFC2727. [2] Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 3] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 2. General The following set of rules apply to the selection and confirmation process as a whole. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included. 1. The principal functions of the nominating committee are to review the open IESG and IAB positions and to either nominate its incumbent or recruit a superior candidate. Although there is no term limit for serving in any IESG or IAB position, the nominating committee may use length of service as one of its criterion for evaluating an incumbent. The nominating committee does not select the open positions to be reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review. The nominating committee will be given the title of the position to be reviewed and brief description of the desirable set of qualifications of the candidate that is nominated to fill each position. Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they do not wish to be nominated. The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it presents its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as indicated below. 2. The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be completed within 3 months. The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be completed one month prior to the friday of the week before the First IETF. It is expected to begin 4 months prior to the Friday of the week before the First IETF. 3. One-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB positions is selected to be reviewed each year. The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately one-half of each of the sitting IESG and IAB members each year. It is recognized that circumstances may exist that will require the nominating committee to review more or less than one-half of the current positions, e.g., if the IESG or IAB have re-organized prior to this process and created new positions, or if there are an odd number of current positions. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 4] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 4. Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a 2 year term. The intent of this rule is to ensure that members of the IESG and IAB serve the number of years that best facilitates the review of one-half of the members each year. It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to choose one or more of the currently open positions to which it may assign a term greater than 2 years in order to ensure the ideal application of this rule in the future. It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to choose one or more of the currently open positions that share responsibilities with other positions (both those being reviewed and those sitting) to which it may assign a term greater than 2 years to ensure that all such members will not be reviewed at the same time. All sitting member terms end during the First IETF meeting corresponding to the end of the term for which they were confirmed. All confirmed candidate terms begin during the First IETF meeting corresponding to the beginning of the term for which they were confirmed. Normally, the confirmed candidate's term begins when the currently sitting member's term ends on the last day of the meeting. A term may begin or end no sooner than the first day of the meeting and no later than the last day of the meeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the currently sitting member and the confirmed candidate. The confirmed candidate's term may overlap the sitting member's term during the meeting as determined by their mutual agreement. 5. Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented here with four qualifications. First, the body with the mid-term vacancy chooses whether to reconvene the current nominating committee to fill the mid-term vacancy or to wait until the next nominating committee is constituted so it can fill the mid-term vacancy. If the body with the mid-term vacancy chooses to wait there is no further action required of the current nominating committee. Second, if the body with the mid-term vacancy chooses to reconvene the current nominating committee, the selection and confirmation process is expected to be completed within 1 month, with all other time periods otherwise unspecified prorated accordingly. Third, the confirming body has two weeks from the day it is notified of a candidate to reject the candidate, Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 5] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 otherwise the candidate is assumed to have been confirmed. Fourth, the term of the confirmed candidate will be either: 1. the remainder of the term of the open position if that remainder is not less than one year. 2. the remainder of the term of the open position plus the next 2 year term if that remainder is less than one year. 6. All deliberations and supporting information that relates to specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are confidential. The nominating committee and confirming body members will be exposed to confidential information as a result of their deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and from those who provide requested supporting information. All members and all other participants are expected to handle this information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity. It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise the current committee on deliberations and results of the prior committee, as necessary and appropriate. 7. Unless otherwise specified, the advise and consent model is used throughout the process. This model is characterized as follows. 1. The IETF Executive Director informs the nominating committee of the IESG and IAB positions to be reviewed. 2. The nominating committee selects candidates and advises the confirming bodies of them. 3. The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates, consenting to some, all, or none. If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the nominating committee with respect to reviewing the open IESG positions is considered complete. If some or none of the candidates are confirmed, the nominating committee must reconvene to select alternate candidates for the rejected candidates. Any additional time required by the nominating committee should not exceed its maximum time allotment. 4. The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB candidates, consenting to some, all, or none. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 6] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the nominating committee with respect to reviewing the open IAB positions is considered complete. If some or none of the candidates are confirmed, the nominating committee must reconvene to select alternate candidates for the rejected candidates. Any additional time required by the nominating committee should not exceed its maximum time allotment. 5. The confirming bodies decide their consent according to a mechanism of their own choosing, which must ensure that at least one-half of the sitting members agree with the decision. At least one-half of the sitting members of the confirming bodies must agree to either confirm or reject each individual nominee. The agreement must be decided within a reasonable timeframe. The agreement may be decided by conducting a formal vote, by asserting consensus based on informal exchanges (email), or by whatever mechanism is used to conduct the normal business of the confirming body. 8. All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements, including a notice on the IETF web site. As of the publication of this document the current mechanism is an email message to both the "ietf" and the "ietf-announce" mailing lists. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 7] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 3. Nominating Committee Selection The following set of rules apply to the creation of the nominating committee and the selection of its members. 1. The process of selecting the members of the nominating committee is expected to be completed within 2 months. The selection process is expected to be completed one month prior to the Third IETF. This ensures there is an opportunity for the nominating committee to meet and prepare to begin its activities no later than the Third IETF. 2. The term of a nominating committee is expected to be 1 year. It is the intent of this rule that there be exactly one nominating committee that is the current, official nominating committee. The term of a nominating committee begins when its members are officially announced. The term ends when the next nominating committee's term begins. A nominating committee is expected to complete any work-in- progress before it is dissolved at the end of its term. 3. The committee comprises at least a non-voting Chair, 10 voting volunteers, and 3 non-voting liaisons. Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting advisor to participate in some or all of the deliberations of the committee. The addition must be approved by both the voting and non-voting members of the committee according to its established voting mechanism. Advisors participate as individuals. Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting liaison from other unrepresented organizations to participate in some or all of the deliberations of the committee. The addition must be approved by both the voting and non-voting members of the committee according to its established voting mechanism. Liaisons participate as representatives of their respective organizations. 4. The Internet Society President appoints the non-voting Chair, who must meet the usual requirements for membership in the nominating committee. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 8] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 The nominating committee Chair must agree to invest the time necessary to ensure that the nominating committee completes its assigned duties and to perform in the best interests of the IETF community in that role. The appointment must be completed no later than the Second IETF meeting to ensure it can be announced during a plenary session at that meeting. This ensures the Chair has approximately two months to conduct the selection process for the nominating committee members and approximately one month to organize one or more initial meetings of the nominating committee prior to the Third IETF meeting. 5. The Chair must establish and announce milestones for the selection of the nominating commitee members. There is a defined time period during which the selection process must be completed. The Chair must establish a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion, will result in the completion of the process on time. 6. The Chair obtains the list of IESG and IAB positions to be reviewed and announces it along with a solicitation for names of volunteers from the IETF community willing to serve on the nominating committee. The solicitation must permit the community at least 30 days during which they may choose to volunteer to be selected for the nominating committee. The list of open positions is published with the solicitation to facilitate community members choosing between volunteering for an open position and volunteering for the nominating committee. 7. Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer. The 3 meetings are the three most recent meetings that ended prior to the date on which the solicitation for nominating committee volunteers was submitted for distribution to the IETF community. 8. Internet Society Board of Trustees, sitting members of the IAB, and sitting members of the IESG may not volunteer. 9. The Chair announces both the list of the pool of volunteers from which the 10 voting volunteers will be randomly selected and the method with which the selection will be completed. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 9] The announcement should be made at least 1 week prior to the date on which the random selection will occur. The pool of volunteers must be enumerated or otherwise indicated according to the needs of the method to be used. The announcement must specify the data that will be used as input to the method. The method must depend on random data whose value is not known or available until the date on which the random selection will occur. It must be possible to independently verify that the method used is both fair and unbiased. A method is fair if each eligible volunteer is equally likely to be selected. A method is unbiased if no one can influence its outcome in favor of a specific outcome. It must be possible to repeat the method, either through iteration or by restarting in such a way as to remain fair and unbiased. This is necessary to replace selected volunteers should they become unavailable after selection. One possible method is described in RFC2777 [1]. 10. The Chair randomly selects and announces the 10 voting volunteers from the pool of names of volunteers. There must be two announcements of the members of the voting members of the nominating committee. The first announcement should occur as soon after the selection as is reasonable for the Chair. The community must have at least 1 week during which any member may challenge the results. The challenge is made and processed according to the usual IETF appeals process except that an initial challenge is submitted to the IETF Chair. During at least the 1 week challenge period the Chair should contact each of the selected volunteers and confirm their willingness and availability to serve. The Chair should make every reasonable effort to contact each selected volunteer. If necessary, the Chair may announce and then iterate the selection process in order to replace a volunteer that is unavailable. There should be at least 1 day between the announcement and the iteration of the selection process. After at least 1 week and confirming that 10 voting volunteers are ready to serve, the Chair makes the second announcement of the voting members of the nominating committee, which officially begins the term of the nominating committee. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 10] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 11. The sitting IAB and IESG members each appoint a non-voting liaison to the nominating committee from their current membership who are not sitting in an open position. 12. The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as a non-voting liaison. The prior year's Chair may select a designee from a pool composed of the voting members of the prior year's committee and all prior Chairs if the Chair is unavailable. If the prior year's Chair is unavailable and is unable or unwilling to make such a designation in a timely fashion, the Chair of the current committee may do so. Selecting a prior year's committee member as the designee permits the experience of the prior year's deliberations to be readily available to the current committee. Selecting an earlier prior year Chair as the designee permits the experience of being a Chair as well as that Chair's committee deliberations to be readily available to the current committee. 13. The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a non-voting liaison to the nominating committee. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 11] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 4. Nominating Committee Operation The following rules apply to the operation of the nominating committee. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included. The rules are organized approximately in the order in which they would be invoked. The term nominee refers to an individual under consideration by the nominating committee. The term candidate refers to a nominee that has been selected by the nominating committee to be considered for confirmation by a confirming body. A confirmed candidate is a candidate that has been reviewed and approved by a confirming body. 1. All rules and special circumstances not otherwise specified are at the discretion of the committee. Exceptional circumstances will occasionally arise during the normal operation of the nominating committee. This rule is intended to foster the continued forward progress of the committee. Any member of the committee may propose a rule for adoption by the committee. The rule must be approved by both the voting and non- voting members of the committee according to its established voting mechanism. All members of the committee should consider whether the exception is worthy of mention in the next revision of this document and followup accordingly. 2. The Chair must establish and announce milestones, which must include at least a call for nominations. There is a defined time period during which the selection and confirmation process must be completed. The Chair must establish a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion, will result in the completion of the process on time. The Chair should allow time for iterating the activities of the committee if one or more candidates is not confirmed. 3. The Chair must establish a voting mechanism. The committee must be able to objectively determine when a decision has been made during its deliberations. The criteria for determining closure must be established and known to all members of the nominating committee. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 12] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 4. At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a vote. A quorum comprises at least 7 voting members. 5. The Chair may establish a process by which a member of the nominating committee may be recalled. The process, if established, must be agreed to by a 3/4 majority of the members of the nominating committee, including the non- voting members since they would be subject to the same process. 6. All members of the nominating committee may participate in all deliberations. The emphasis of this rule is that no member, whether voting or non-voting, can be explicitly excluded from any deliberation. However, a member may individually choose not to participate in a deliberation. 7. The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed and the call for nominees. The call for nominees must include a request for comments regarding the past performance of incumbents, which will be considered during the deliberations of the nominating committee. The call must request that a nomination include a valid, working email address, a telephone number, or both for the nominee. The nomination must include the set of skills or expertise the nominator believes the nominee has that would be desirable. 8. Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of the IETF community for any open position. A self-nomination is permitted. 9. Nominating committee members must not be nominees. To be a nominee is to enter the process of being selected as a candidate and confirmed. Nominating committee members are not eligible to be considered for filling any open position. They become ineligible as soon as term of the nominating committee on which they serve begins. They remain ineligible for the duration of this nominating committee's term. 10. Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG or IAB position during the previous two years must not be nominees. 11. The nominating committee selects candidates based on its Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 13] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the qualifications required to fill the open positions. The intent of this rule is to ensure that the nominating committee consults with a broad base of the IETF community for input to its deliberations. In particular, the nominating committee must determine if the desired qualifications for the open positions matches its understanding of the qualifications desired by the IETF community. The consultations are permitted to include a slate of nominees, if all parties to the consultation agree to observe the same confidentiality rules as the nominating committee itself. A broad base of the community should include the existing members of the IAB and IESG, especially sitting members who share responsibilities with open positions, e.g., co-Area Directors. 12. Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and must consent to their nomination prior to being confirmed. Although the nominating committee will make every reasonable effort to contact and to remain in contact with nominees, any nominee whose contact information changes during the process and who wishes to still be considered should inform the nominating committee of the changes. The nominating committee should help nominees provide justification to their employers. A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and include a commitment to provide the resources necessary to fill the open position and an assurance that the nominee will perform the duties of the position for which they are being considered in the best interests of the IETF community. 13. The nominating committee advises the confirming bodies of their candidates, specifying a single candidate for each open position and a testament as to how each candidate meets the qualifications of an open position. For each candidate, the testament must include a brief statement of the qualifications for the position that is being filled, which may be exactly the qualifications that were requested. If the qualifications differ from the desired qualifications originally requested a brief statement explaining the difference must be included. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 14] The testament may include either or both a brief resume of the candidate or a brief summary of the deliberations of the nominating committee. 14. With respect to any action to be taken in the context of notifying and announcing confirmed candidates, and notifying rejected nominees and candidates, the action must be valid according to all of the rules specified below prior to its execution. 1. Up until a candidate is confirmed, the identity of the candidate must be kept confidential. 2. The identity of all nominees must be kept confidential (except that the nominee may publicize their intentions). 3. Rejected nominees may be notified as soon as they are rejected. 4. Rejected candidates may be notified as soon as they are rejected. 5. Rejected nominees and candidates must be notified prior to announcing confirmed candidates. 6. Confirmed candidates may be notified and announced as soon as they are confirmed. It is consistent with these rules for a nominee to never know if they were a candidate or not. It is consistent with these rules for some nominees to be rejected early in the process and for some nominees to be kept as alternates in case a candidate is rejected by a confirming body. In the matter of whether a confirmed candidate was a first choice or an alternate, that information need not ever be disclosed and, in fact, probably never should be. It is consistent with these rules for confirmed candidates to be notified and announced as quickly as possible instead of requiring all confirmed candidates to wait until all open positions have been reviewed. When consulting with individual members of the IETF community, if all parties to the consultation agree to observe the same confidentiality rules as the nominating committee itself then the consultations are permitted to include a slate of nominees. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 15] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 15. The nominating committee should archive the information that has been collected or produced by the committee for a period of time not to exceed the term of the committee. The purpose of the archive is to assist the nominating committee should it be necessary for it to fill a mid-term vacancy. The existence of an archive, how it is implemented, and what information to archive is at the discretion of the committee. The decisions must be approved by the voting members of the committee. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 16] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 5. Member Recall The following rules apply to the recall process. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included. 1. Anyone may request the recall of any sitting IAB or IESG member, at any time, upon written (email is acceptable) request with justification to the Internet Society President. 2. Internet Society President shall appoint a Recall Committee Chair. The Internet Society President must not evaluate the recall request. It is explicitly the responsibility of the IETF community to evaluate the behavior of its leaders. 3. The recall committee is created according to the same rules as is the nominating committee with the qualifications that the person being investigated and the person requesting the recall must not be a member of the recall committee in any capacity. 4. The recall committee operates according to the same rules as the nominating committee with the qualification that there is no confirmation process. 5. The recall committee investigates the circumstances of the justification for the recall and votes on its findings. The investigation must include at least both an opportunity for the member being recalled to present a written statement and consultation with third parties. 6. A 3/4 majority of the members who vote on the question is required for a recall. 7. If a sitting member is recalled the open position is to be filled according to the mid-term vacancy rules. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 17] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 6. Changes From RFC2727 This section describes the changes from RFC2727 that are currently incorporated in this draft. The changes represent a proposal to the working group for it to review and approve, with any additional changes the consensus of the working group determines are necessary. Comments, suggestions, or questions should be directed to the mailing list for this working group. This proposal does not respond to all of the open issues before this working group. There are additional issues yet to be resolved that are not covered in this proposal. Editorial changes are not described here, only substantive changes. They are listed here in the order in which they appear in the document. 1. A definition of a sitting member was added to Section 1. 2. A comment about term limits was added to Section 2 Rule 1. 3. In Section 2 Rule 1 the NOMCOM must now be provided with a brief description of the desirable set of qualifications for the candidate to be nominated for each position. 4. In Section 2 Rule 5 the body with the mid-term vacancy may now choose either to reconvene the current NOMCOM to fill it or to wait for the next NOMCOM to fill it. 5. In Section 2 Rule 8 was added to define that all announcements are made with the usual IETF secretariat mechanism. 6. Section 3, Nominating Committee Selection, was re-organized so that explicit timeframes could be specified for the various steps in the selection process. The following suggestions are included in the re-organization. 1. The selection process must be completed within 2 months. 2. A term was defined for a nominating committee. 3. Liaisons and advisors are no longer required to meet the usual requirements for nominating committee membership. 4. The Chair must be appointed by and announced during the Second IETF. 5. The IETF community can challenge the results of the Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 18] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 selection process that determined the members of the nominating committee. 6. The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a non- voting liaison. 7. In Section 4. Rule 7. nominations for open positions should include both contact information and a description of the skills or expertise the nominator believes the nominee possesses. 8. In Section 4. Rule 12. nominees are requested to keep the nominating committee informed of changes in their contact information. 9. In Section 4. Rule 13. a description of a testament to be provided with a slate to a confirming body by the nominating committee is specified. 10. In Section 4. Rule 15. was added stating that the nominating committee is permitted to keep an archive for the duration of its term of the information it collects and produces for its use during its term. 11. Section 8., Security Considerations, was expanded. 12. Appendix A., Oral Tradition, has been added. Suggestions for additional information to include are welcome. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 19] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 7. Acknowledgements There have been a number of people involved with the development of this document over the years. A great deal of credit goes to the first three Nominating Committee Chairs: 1993 - Jeff Case 1994 - Fred Baker 1995 - John Curran who had the pleasure of operating without the benefit of a documented process. It was their fine work and oral tradition that became the first version of this document. Of course we can not overlook the bug discovery burden that each of the Chairs since the first publication have had to endure: 1996 - Guy Almes 1997 - Geoff Houston 1998 - Mike St. Johns 1999 - Donald Eastlake 2000 - Avri Doria 2001 - Bernard Adoba 2002 - Ted T'so Of course the bulk of the credit goes to the members of the POISSON Working Group, previously the POISED Working Group. The prose here would not be what it is were it not for the attentive and insightful review of its members. Specific acknowledgement must be extended to Scott Bradner and John Klensin, who have consistently contributed to the improvement of this document throughout its evolution. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 20] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 8. Security Considerations Any selection, confirmation, or recall process necessarily involves investigation into the qualifications and activities of prospective candidates. The investigation may reveal confidential or otherwise private information about candidates to those participating in the process. Each person who participates in any aspect of the process must maintain the confidentiality of any and all information not explicitly identified as suitable for public dissemination. When the nominating committee decides it is necessary to share confidential or otherwise private information with others, the dissemination must be minimal and must include a prior committment from all persons consulted to observe the same confidentiality rules as the nominating committee itself. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 21] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 References [1] Eastlake, D., "Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection", RFC 2777, February 2000. [2] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 2727, February 2000. [3] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 2282, February 1998. Author's Address James M. Galvin eList eXpress LLC 607 Trixsam Road Sykesville, MD 21784 US Phone: +1 410-549-4619 Fax: +1 410-795-7978 EMail: galvin+ietf@elistx.com URI: http://www.elistx.com/ Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 22] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 Appendix A. Oral Tradition Over the years various nominating committees have learned through oral tradition passed on by liaisons that there are certain consistencies in the process and information considered during deliberations. Some items from that oral tradition are collected here to facilitate its consideration by future nominating committees. 1. It has been found that experience as an IETF Working Group Chair or an IRTF Research Group Chair is helpful in giving a nominee experience of what the job of an Area Director involves. It is also helps a nominating committee judge the technical, people, and process management skills of the nominee. 2. Prospective Area Directors should have been a Working Group Chair in the area in which they are being nominated to serve. 3. No person should ever be nominated to serve on both the IESG and the IAB concurrently; this does not apply to the IETF Chair who serves on both bodies by definition. 4. The strength of the IAB is found in part in the balance of the demographics of its members (e.g., national distribution, years of experience, gender, etc.), the combined skill set of its members, and the combined sectors (e.g., industry, academia, etc.) represented by its members. 5. There are no term limits explicitly because the issue of continuity versus turnover should be evaluated each year according to the expectations of the IETF community, as it is understood by each nominating committee. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 23] Internet-Draft IAB and IESG Selection June 2002 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Galvin Expires December 21, 2002 [Page 24]