Hi Andrew, I think you're probably right that some more guidance for future ISOC presidents is a good thing. I like the idea of asking for volunteers. With others I'm less keen on the idea of publishing a long list of volunteers - we have a history of seeing some people volunteer for things for which they're not at all qualified and it doesn't seem useful to me to extend the set of things for which such people can have their names listed. I do like the idea of publishing a short-list (of people that the ISOC president considers qualified) and soliciting feedback on that. It ought be made clear though that that's an optional step - there could well be years where there's only person who is both qualified and available, or, people on the short-list might become unavailable - so it ought still be considered nominal if a noncom-chair is just announced as happens today. Lastly, I also agree that previous nomcom experience while desirable is not the main qualification - the previous year's chair and liaisons can help with that as needed IMO. Plenty of experience in the IETF seems to me more likely to be a better requirement. Cheers, S. On 14/02/2022 05:54, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
Dear colleagues, I write with my job hat on. I'm employed by the Internet Society. Part of my job here is to select the NomCom Chair. I've been uncomfortable about how that has worked in the past, and more than a year ago I said I'd write a new process. I failed at that goal, but it's a new year so I've finally written this. It's at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sullivan-nomcom-chair-select/. I am eagerly requesting feedback on that draft _for things under my control_. The procedures in RFC 8713 give me a lot of latitude in how to deal with this appointment. They give me no control whatsoever as to whether I _should_ be able to do this, who else should do it, and so on. Feedback of the form "Here's how NomCom should work for real," will be ignored, because they will not provide me guidance as to what I should do. Please also resist the temptation to tell me, "Tell someone else it's their thing and promise to follow what they promise." If the IETF wants to modify RFC 8713, including removing my own role in this selection, I don't imagine a universe in which I'd work to work to foil that. But similarly I am not willing to create an entirely new consultative body (or new job for an existing consultative body) without the community saying so. This document is merely an outline of how I plan to execute my duties as they're already defined. I hope this will be a modest contribution to the IETF, and I look forward to your suggestions. _Please_ send me feedback directly and not copied to the list. I won't be able to follow discussion about this on the list except sporadically, and I'm going to have to put this plan into action some time in the coming weeks. Thanks very much. Best regards, A
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
