Hi Rich, Both of Michael's suggestions sound reasonable to me, i.e., (1) To re-randomize to minimize the risk of the system being gamed. (2) To use other sources of randomness that are verifiable, but that are readily available without waiting a long time. For clarity, are you saying that even if the verifiable sources of randomness were available in a relatively short time frame (e.g., max 24 hours) that would still necessitate a 1 or 2 week delay in the process? Regards, Rob -----Original Message----- From: ietf <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Salz, Rich Sent: 26 April 2023 13:42 To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx>; ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: NomCom selection Fwd: Notification for draft-eastlake-rfc3797bis-00.txt On 4/25/2023 3:22 PM, Salz, Rich wrote: > I don't think re-randomize is what we should be doing. Just go to the next one on the initial list. On 4/25/23, 5:24 PM, "Michael StJohns" <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: The problem with that is gaming the system. Yes that could be a problem. The trade-off is that redoing the randomization delays the process by at least a week, more likely two.
