Hi Rich, So, my reading of the spirit of this text, if not the precise steps, and noting that the proposal is to update the process, are: (1) there should be a week between advertising the list of volunteers before making the initial selection (e.g., so that the community can check that the list is valid). (2) there should be at least a day if a voting volunteer becomes invalid and needs to be replaced. (3) there should be at least a week after the list has been finalized to allow the final makeup of the Nomcom to be challenged if needs be. Hence, my interpretation is that if someone isn't available, then part of step (2) needs to be redone, possibly multiple times, and it probably delays when (3) completes. But it isn't inherently obvious to me, that if we can use some of the other sources of random data that is more available, as Michael proposes, then why we can't do the re-selection part of step (2) in approx. 24-48 hours (per iteration, if more than one is required), including allowing for at least 24 hours for a newly selected volunteer to confirm that they can serve. Regards, Rob -----Original Message----- From: Salz, Rich <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: 26 April 2023 14:48 To: Joel Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Wilton (rwilton) <rwilton@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx Subject: Re: NomCom selection Fwd: Notification for draft-eastlake-rfc3797bis-00.txt Read https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8713.html#name-selection-process and https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8713.html#name-announcement-of-selection-r
