|
Bob, I've read through the draft, and would prefer a different approach. Since we already have a recall procedure for contested removals, this draft should focus itself on uncontested removals, and really just absense. How do you test if something is uncontested? Easy enough: ask the IETF community. If a single person objects, let's call that "contested" and go with the other procedure. Eliot On 10/24/12 6:14 PM, Bob Hinden wrote:
The draft that proposes changes to the RFC3777/BCP10 to deal with vacancies is now available. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-genarea-bcp10upd-00 Bob -------------------- From: Internet-Drafts@xxxxxxxx To: i-d-announce@xxxxxxxx Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@xxxxxxxx Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-genarea-bcp10upd-00.txt X-C5I-RSN: 1/0/935/46939/50333 A new Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : RFC 3777 Update for Vacancies Author(s) : D. Crocker, et al Filename : draft-ietf-genarea-bcp10upd Pages : 4 Date : Oct. 24, 2012 BCP 10 (RFC 3777) specifies IETF processes for selection, confirmation and recall of appointees to IETF positions. It also refers to the mechanism of resignation as part of a sequence that moves a sitting member to a new IETF position. However it does not more generally deal with vacancies created by resignation, death or uncontested, sustained absence from participation. This update to BCP 10 specifies procedures for handling vacancies. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-genarea-bcp10upd-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ |