Re: One week left to object

["Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

• I'm assuming that I missed some discussions, but assuming that we end up changing the process **for future nomcoms**, why wouldn't we just select an additional 0.5*NOMCOM backup members, according to the normal rules, including no more than N from a company, etc.

 

This is what everyone did once we started using RFC 3797. It’s what RFC 3797 itself suggests.

 

Some are concerned about the case when “Rich from Akamai” in the initial list stepping down so that “Kyle from Akamai” could get picked as the replacement. Disqualifying “Kyle from Akamai” as the first alternate doesn’t seem right if “Rich from Akamai” does step down. Either way, the system can be gamed. Whether the holes are important enough to worry about is for the IETF community to decide.