Skip to main content

Updating the Term Dates of IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) Members
draft-bradner-iaoc-terms-04

Yes

(Barry Leiba)
(Ben Campbell)
(Brian Haberman)
(Jari Arkko)
(Kathleen Moriarty)

No Objection

(Alissa Cooper)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Benoît Claise)
(Deborah Brungard)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 01 and is now closed.

Barry Leiba Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (for -03) Unknown

                            
Ben Campbell Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (for -03) Unknown

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (for -01) Unknown

                            
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (2015-09-03) Unknown
This is a fine document, even if the need for it makes me discouraged about our ability to get any process right the first time :-)

I would support text changes to accommodate Stephen's #2 and #3 comments.
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -03) Unknown

                            
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2015-08-31 for -03) Unknown
wfm
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2015-09-01 for -03) Unknown
Three nits, could be worth fixing though:

1. Is "Updates: 4071" correct in the header? I'd have
expected "Updates: BCP 101" or nothing (and that this be
added to BCP101).

2. Section 2 says: "the sentence defining when IOAC
member terms" that seems possibly quite loosely written -
quoting the precise text to be removed would be better
and not hard. (If that were hard, then this point should
be a discuss I guess;-)

3. Section 2 also says "relative to the above mentioned
IAOC meeting" - that's ambiguous and could be interpreted
as meaning that it is ok for the IAOC to decide that
terms will start 11 months after that meeting. (At least
if there's no other text somewhere else that'd prevent
that.) Again, that seems loose and easily improved, just
add a sentence saying "IAOC member terms MUST start/end
close to the time of the 1st IETF meeting."