Good idea, but suggest to go wider than your a-d and stick to: > anyone who was "part > of the IETF community". In practice, that will mean, anyone who someone else thinks was a part of the community. It would not be seemly to squabble about whether someone had really played a significant part in the IETF, and would be better to include anyone on request. I think the reality is that no=one would make the request unless they felt that the IETF had been a significant part of the deceased's life. Cheers, Adrian > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dave > Crocker > Sent: 21 October 2012 17:32 > To: IETF Discussion > Subject: In Memoriam IETF web page > > Folks, > > A thread on the nanog list, about abha ahuja, reminds me of a suggestion > I made casually to a few folk after the last IETF meeting: > > We should consider having a persistent IETF page in memory of > people who were part of our community. > > While the idea is simple, the comments I got back make clear that it > needs to be pursued carefully. That requires some formality. > > There are two different lines of consideration. These are offered as a > starting point for discussion: > > > 1. Who should be listed? > > A number of different models make sense, but the challenge is > something that is workable. For example, it does not seem like the sort > of thing that would be appropriate for a consensus call to the > community, for each entry. I think that means the rules should be > entirely mechanical. > > Conceptually, the goal should be to include anyone who was "part > of the IETF community". I'll suggest that any of these would qualify: > > a. Held a formal position in the IETF (AD, WG Chair, IAOC/Trust, > IAB, IRTF, Nomcom, ...are there others?) > > b. Held a position on an IETF committee (directorate, > advisory, ...) > > c. Held a position on IETF staff (IAD, RFC Editor and, I think, > this should include on-going contractors, including AMS and RFC > document editors. > > d. RFC author > > > 2. What should be the form of the page? > > I suggest we keep it extremely simple: an alphabetic listing by > name, with a photo, if available, and a pointer to a page if they have > one. In some cases, the IETF might formulate its own page for a person, > but that's distinct from this basic listing. > > > Thoughts? > > d/ > > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net