Phillip, >Consider the following situation, imagine that there is a vacancy for a security area director, consider further that I wish for nefarious reasons to secure the nomination of a particular candidate which left to its own devices the NOMCON would be unlikely to choose. The first step in such a campaign would be to draw up a matrix of the members of the NOMCON, the people who they are most likely to respond to etc. It is unlikely that I need more than four people prominent in the Security world to make a concerted recommendation in favor of my candidate. I could do this without speaking to any member of the NOMCON myself. > >If you were a member of the NOMCON trying to fill a hard to fill post such as Security or Routing and you had a series of people prominent in the area come to you recommending a particular candidate the chances are that you would follow the recommendation. > > I'm not saying there is nothing in the Nomcom process that couldn't be improved, but in the above you are not giving enough credit for the folks in Nomcom. Remember that they are working hard to get a lot of input. (According to the slides from IETF-65 plenary, the last Nomcom sent out 1850 requests for feedback.) I'm sure they will also evaluate the input based on context, e.g., recommendations by colleagues from the same company vs. others, very different recommendations from different people, people who have worked with the candidate in the IETF vs. others, etc. --Jari _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf