At 11:41 22-09-10, John C Klensin wrote:
raising issues of privacy, etc. I'm not too concerned about it,
but I wish that there had been more discussion of whether this
was necessary and other ways to accomplish it if it is.
Yes.
RFC 5680 was published in October, 2009. It would be strange if we
have to resort to interpretations of the RFC in this discussion about
Open Disclosure of Willing Nominees.
Quoting from Section 4:
'We assume that asking for feedback from the entire community is
preferable to asking for feedback from large segments of the
community, while keeping the rest of the community "in the dark".'
And quoting from Section 6:
"The list of nominees willing to be considered for positions under
review in the current NomCom cycle is not confidential. The
NomCom may disclose a list of names of nominees who are willing to
be considered for positions under review to the community, in
order to obtain feedback from the community on these nominees."
We can nit about what "disclose a list of names" means or we can
argue that the text does not say that "the list of names will be
publicly available".
At 12:28 22-09-10, Ross Callon wrote:
Also, I don't think that we want press articles about who is running
for IETF leadership positions, who was rejected and who was
accepted, and so on. Thus the fact that the current approach makes
you agree to keep the names confidential would appear to be a very
strong statement to the press not to publish the contents of the list.
Having press articles is a side effect of being public. Whether one
likes it or not, one has to live with it or else one might end up
devising ways around the spirit of the RFC. There was a discussion
about the visibility when making the selection in February 2009 [1].
Quoting part of a message from Brian Carpenter [2]:
"As for the general principle of publishing the list, it was suggested
to me today (in Beijing) that being nominated, even if not selected,
may be well viewed as an honour."
And Leslie Daigle [3]:
"But, if the IETF community decided it still doesn't want to have a public
list of only the list of willing volunteers, it would remain an option."
And in a message from Spencer Dawkins [4]:
"We note that (for example) the Internet Architecture Board publishes
the nominee list for their representative to the Internet Society
Board of Trustees, without apparent ill effects, but we are also
willing to accept that a NomCom might consider nominees whose names
have not been announced, for a variety of reasons, if this is the
right thing to do, in NomCom's judgement."
I have read the comments posted by the NomCom Chair [5].
Regards,
-sm
1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/msg00066.html
2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/msg00081.html
3. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/msg00077.html
4. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-nomcom/current/msg00338.html
5. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg63827
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf