On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 1:40 PM Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"repeat the random selection process" is not particularly good wording. That process uses the announced random sources so it is just looking further down the list as ordered by the already run random selection process.I understand that there is some belief that someone might refuse to serve so as to move the nomcom selection to a subsequent person selected by the random process. I personally don't think this is worth worrying about. But if you did worry, this supposed problem could only be solved by new random input and, furthermore, that new random input would have to have been precisely specified in advance. There are a few choices:(1) As it is and has always been interpreted since the RFC specified random selection process has been in use. In this case, there is a possibility of people who have been randomly selected non-randomly, in effect, passing their nomcom membership to one other qualified volunteer. They have no control over who they could transfer to, their only choice is to transfer or not.
Correct, but they get to look at the next person on the list.
(2) You use some new random seed created in some way that has not been publicly announced. This gives the nomcom chair complete control over who is selected to replace any of the initial random selectees who cannot/will-not serve. This seems much worse than choice 1 above(3) The nomcom chair announces new randomness sources and does a new randomization of the remaining qualified volunteers. This has NEVER been done. But it could be. However, this is not the process specified in RFC 3797 which is what everyone has been following. Furthermore, you might have to do this several times so maybe the nomcom chair would have to specify something like a "daily numbers" type lottery as well as precisely how the new randomness is used. Is it used as a suffix or a prefix of the original seed? .... And even then, the nomcom chair might be able to pick which day they use the number from to do the new randomization. So, even with a pre-announced source of new randomness and a new precise algorithm, the nomcom chair would still have significant control.
I don't understand how this gives the nomcom chair control because they don't know what the value will be.
-Ekr
All is all, I think we are better sticking with option 1, which is how it has been done every year since 1998.Thanks,
Donald
===============================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
d3e3e3@xxxxxxxxxOn Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 3:43 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 12:40 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 8:49 AM NomCom Chair 2022 <nomcom-chair-2022@xxxxxxxx> wrote:There's one week left to object to the current list of NomCom voting members. As a reminder, they are:
- Quan Xiong,Wuhan Zhongxing Software Company Limited
- Xuesong Geng,Huawei
- Geoff Huston,APN IC
- Sarah Banks,Corelight, Inc
- Georgios Karagiannis,Huawei
- Lixia Zhang,UCLA
- Jon Hudson,Desnet Industries & Spaced Out Radio
- Luc Andre Burdet,Cisco
- Mark Nottingham,Cloudflare
- Ran Chen,Nanjing Zhongxingxin Software Co.Ltd
One person has not responded to multiple attempts over the past week. The next three people on the list are:
- Ines Robles, Tampere University
- Huaimo Chen, Futurewei
- Daniel Havey, Microsoft
I emailed Ines yesterday to see if she is willing and able, and to Daniel this morning in case Ines cannot do it. Huaimo is disqualified because there are already two people from Huawei on the committee.I do not believe that this is the correct process. RFC 7347 says:Oops. 8713, but it says the same thingo If the Chair is unable to contact a voting volunteer, the Chair must repeat the random selection process in order to replace the unavailable volunteer. There should be at least one day between the announcement of the iteration and the selection process.
IOW, it doesn't matter who is next on the list. You need to rerun the randomization
to replace the missing volunteer.
-Ekr
Please note that *anyone* can object to the list because of those omitted, not just the seven who were left off. For details, see https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/kAVc3aWAomaxeJSZvu_eEbwZVvI/.
Thank you.
-Rich Salz, 2022 NomCom Chair
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
