Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility
draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-09
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 8989.
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Brian E. Carpenter , Stephen Farrell | ||
| Last updated | 2021-01-07 (Latest revision 2021-01-01) | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews | |||
| Additional resources | |||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Bron Gondwana | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2020-12-07 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 8989 (Experimental) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Alissa Cooper | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-09
Network Working Group B.E. Carpenter
Internet-Draft Univ. of Auckland
Intended status: Experimental S. Farrell
Expires: 5 July 2021 Trinity College Dublin
1 January 2021
Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility
draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-09
Abstract
This document defines a process experiment under RFC 3933 that
temporarily updates the criteria for qualifying volunteers to
participate in the IETF Nominating Committee. It therefore also
updates the criteria for qualifying signatories to a community recall
petition. The purpose is to make the criteria more flexible in view
of increasing remote participation in the IETF and a reduction in
face-to-face meetings. The experiment is of fixed duration and will
apply to one, or at most two, consecutive Nominating Committee
cycles. This document temporarily varies the rules in RFC 8713.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Discussion of this document takes place on the ad hoc mailing list
(eligibility-discuss@ietf.org), which is archived at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eligibility-discuss/
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eligibility-discuss/).
Source for this draft can be found at https://github.com/sftcd/elig
(https://github.com/sftcd/elig).
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 July 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Term and Evaluation of the Experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Clarifying Detail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Omitted Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix A. Available data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.1. Draft-09 to -09 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.2. Draft-07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.3. Draft-06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.4. Draft-05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
B.5. Draft-04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
B.6. Draft-03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
B.7. Draft-02 to -03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
B.8. Draft-01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
B.9. Draft-00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
1. Introduction
According to [RFC8713], the IETF Nominating Committee (NomCom) is
populated from a pool of volunteers with a specified record of
attendance at IETF plenary meetings, assumed when that document was
approved to be face-to-face meetings. In view of the cancellation of
the IETF 107, 108, 109 and 110 face-to-face meetings, the risk of
future cancellations, the probability of less frequent face-to-face
meetings in future in support of sustainability, and a general
increase in remote participation, this document defines a process
experiment [RFC3933] of fixed duration (described in Section 2) to
use modified and additional criteria to qualify volunteers.
During this experiment, the eligibility criteria for signing recall
petitions - which [RFC8713] defines to be the same as those for
NomCom eligibility - are consequently also modified as described in
this document. This experiment has no other effect on the recall
process.
2. Term and Evaluation of the Experiment
The cancellation of the in-person IETF 107 through 110 meetings means
that the current criteria are in any case seriously perturbed for at
least two years. The experiment therefore needs to start as soon as
possible. However, the experiment did not apply to the selection of
the 2020-2021 Nominating Committee, which was performed according to
[RFC8788].
The experiment will initially cover the IETF Nominating Committee
cycle that begins in 2021. As soon as the entire 2021-2022
Nominating Committee is seated, the IESG must consult the 2021-2022
Nominating Committee chair and the 2020-2021 Nominating Committee
chair and publish a report on the results of the experiment. Points
to be considered are whether the experiment has produced a
sufficiently large and diverse pool of individuals, whether enough of
those individuals have volunteered to produce a representative
Nominating Committee with good knowledge of the IETF, and whether all
the goals in Section 3 have been met. If possible, a comparison with
results from the previous procedure (i.e., RFC 8713) should be made.
The IESG must then also begin a community discussion of whether to:
1. Amend [RFC8713] in time for the 2022-2023 Nominating Committee
cycle; or
2. Prolong the current experiment for a second and final year with
additional clarifications specific to the 2022-2023 cycle; or
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
3. Run a different experiment for the next nominating cycle; or
4. Revert to [RFC8713].
The IESG will determine and announce the consensus of this discussion
in good time for the 2022-2023 Nominating Committee cycle to
commence.
In the event of prolongation of this experiment for a second year,
the IESG will repeat the consultation, report and community
discussion process accordingly, but this document lapses at the end
of the 2022-2023 Nominating Committee cycle.
3. Goals
The goals of the modified and additional criteria are as follows:
* Mitigate the issue of active remote (or rarely in-person)
participants being disenfranchised in the NomCom and recall
processes.
* Enable the selection of a 2021-2022 NomCom, and possibly a
2022-2023 NomCom, when it is impossible for anyone to have
attended three out of the last five IETF meetings in person.
* Prepare for an era in which face-to-face plenary meetings are less
frequent (thus extending the issue to many, perhaps a majority, of
participants).
* Ensure that those eligible have enough current understanding of
IETF practices and people to make informed decisions.
* Provide algorithmic criteria, so that the Secretariat can check
them mechanically against available data.
4. Criteria
This experiment specifies several alternative paths to qualification,
replacing the single criterion in section 4.14 of [RFC8713]. Any one
of the paths is sufficient, unless the person is otherwise
disqualified under section 4.15 of [RFC8713]:
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
* Path 1: The person has registered for and attended 3 out of the
last 5 IETF meetings. For meetings held entirely online, online
registration and attendance counts as attendance. For the
2021-2022 Nominating Committee, the meetings concerned will be
IETF 106, 107, 108, 109, and 110. Attendance is as determined by
the record keeping of the secretariat for in-person meetings, and
based on being a registered person who logged in for at least one
session of an online IETF meeting.
* Path 2: Has been a Working Group Chair or Secretary within the 3
years prior to the day the call for NomCom volunteers is sent to
the community.
* Path 3: Has been a listed author or editor (on the front page) of
at least 2 IETF stream RFCs within the last 5 years prior to the
day the call for NomCom volunteers is sent to the community. An
Internet-Draft that has been approved by the IESG and is in the
RFC Editor queue counts the same as a published RFC (with the
relevant date being the date the draft was added to the RFC Editor
queue). So the 5 year timer extends back to the date 5 years
before the date when the call for NomCom volunteers is sent to the
community.
Notes:
* Path 1 corresponds approximately to [RFC8713], modified as per
[RFC8788].
* Path 3 includes approved drafts, since some documents spend a long
time in the RFC Editor's queue.
* Path 3 extends to 5 years because it commonly takes 3 or 4 years
for new documents to be approved in the IETF stream, so 3 years
would be too short a sampling period.
* All the required data are available to the IETF Secretariat from
meeting attendance records or the IETF data tracker.
4.1. Clarifying Detail
Path 1 does not qualify people who register and attend face-to-face
meetings remotely. That is, it does not qualify remote attendees at
IETF 106, because that meeting took place prior to any question of
cancelling meetings.
If the IESG prolongs this experiment for a second year, as allowed by
Section 2, the IESG must also clarify how Path 1 applies to IETF 111,
112 and 113.
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
5. Omitted Criteria
During community discussions of this document, certain criteria were
rejected as not truly indicating effective IETF participation, or as
being unlikely to significantly expand the volunteer pool. These
included authorship of individual or Working-Group-adopted Internet-
Drafts, sending email to IETF lists, reviewing drafts, acting as a
BOF Chair, and acting in an external role for the IETF (liaisons
etc.).
One path, service in the IESG or IAB within the last 5 years, was
found to have no benefit since historical data show that such people
always appear to be qualified by another path.
Since the criteria must be measurable by the Secretariat, no
qualitative evaluation of an individual's contributions is
considered.
6. IANA Considerations
This document makes no request of IANA.
7. Security Considerations
This document should not affect the security of the Internet.
8. Acknowledgements
Useful comments were received from Abdussalam Baryun, Alissa Cooper,
Lars Eggert, Adrian Farrel, Bron Gondwana, Russ Housley, Chrsitian
Huitema, Ben Kaduk, John Klensin, Victor Kuarsingh, Warren Kumari,
Barry Leiba, Eric Rescorla, Michael Richardson, Rich Salz, Ines
Robles, Martin Thomson and Magnus Westerlund.
The data analysis was mainly done by Robert Sparks. Carsten Bormann
showed how to represent Venn diagrams in ASCII art.
9. Normative References
[RFC3933] Klensin, J. and S. Dawkins, "A Model for IETF Process
Experiments", BCP 93, RFC 3933, DOI 10.17487/RFC3933,
November 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3933>.
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
[RFC8713] Kucherawy, M., Ed., Hinden, R., Ed., and J. Livingood,
Ed., "IAB, IESG, IETF Trust, and IETF LLC Selection,
Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the IETF
Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 8713,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8713, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8713>.
[RFC8788] Leiba, B., "Eligibility for the 2020-2021 Nominating
Committee", BCP 10, RFC 8788, DOI 10.17487/RFC8788, May
2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8788>.
Appendix A. Available data
An analysis of how some of the above criteria would affect the number
of NomCom-qualified participants if applied in August 2020 has been
performed. The results are presented below in Venn diagrams as
Figure 1 to Figure 4. Note that the numbers shown differ slightly
from manual counts due to database mismatches, and the results were
not derived at the normal time of the year for NomCom formation. The
remote attendee lists for IETF 107 and 108 were used, although not
yet available on the IETF web site.
A specific difficulty is that the databases involved inevitably
contain a few inconsistencies such as duplicate entries, differing
versions of a person's name, and impersonal authors. (For example,
"IAB" qualifies under Path 3, and one actual volunteer artificially
appears not to qualify.) This underlines that automatically
generated lists of eligible and qualified people will always require
manual checking.
The first two diagrams illustrate how the new paths (2 and 3) affect
eligibility numbers compared to the meeting participation path (1).
Figure 1 gives the raw numbers, and Figure 2 removes those
disqualified according to RFC 8713. The actual 2020 volunteer pool
is shown too.
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
People eligible via path 1,
3 of 5 meetings: 842
+----------------------+
| |
| 379 |
| +-----------+----------------+
| | | | People eligible
| | 332 | 1104 | via paths
| | | | 2 or 3:
| +------+-----------+-------+ | 1541
| | | | | |
| | 29 | 102 | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
+---+------+-----------+ | |
| | | |
| | 3 | |
| | | |
| +-------------------+--------+
| |
| 1 |
| |
+--------------------------+
2020 actual volunteers: 135
Figure 1: All paths, before disqualification
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
Qualified via path 1,
3 of 5 meetings: 806
+----------------------+
| |
| 375 |
| +-----------+----------------+
| | | | Qualified
| | 300 | 1104 | via paths
| | | | 2 or 3:
| +------+-----------+-------+ | 1509
| | | | | |
| | 29 | 102 | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
+---+------+-----------+ | |
| | | |
| | 3 | |
| | | |
| +-------------------+--------+
| |
| 1 |
| |
+--------------------------+
2020 actual volunteers: 135
Figure 2: All paths, after disqualification
Figure 3 and Figure 4 illustrate how the new paths (2 and 3) interact
with each other, also before and after disqualifications. The
discarded path via IESG and IAB service (Section 5) is also shown, as
path "I". The data clearly show that path "I" has no practical
value.
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
People eligible via path 2
Total: 253
+----------------------+
| |
| 46 |
| +-----------+----------------+
| | | | People eligible
| | 176 | 1266 | via path 3
| | | | Total:
| +------+-----------+-------+ | 1493
| | | | | |
| | 2 | 29 | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
+---+------+-----------+ | |
| | | |
| | 22 | |
| | | |
| +-------------------+--------+
| |
| 2 |
| |
+--------------------------+
People eligible via path "I": 55
Figure 3: New paths, before disqualification
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
Qualified via path 2
Total: 234
+----------------------+
| |
| 45 |
| +-----------+----------------+
| | | | Qualified
| | 172 | 1264 | via path 3
| | | | Total:
| +------+-----------+-------+ | 1463
| | | | | |
| | 1 | 16 | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
+---+------+-----------+ | |
| | | |
| | 11 | |
| | | |
| +-------------------+--------+
| |
| 0 |
| |
+--------------------------+
Qualified via path "I": 28
Figure 4: New paths, after disqualification
Appendix B. Change Log
This section is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
B.1. Draft-09 to -09
* IETF Last Call comments
B.2. Draft-07 to -08
* AD review comments
B.3. Draft-06 to -07
* Clarifications following reviews by Lars Eggert, Victor Kuarsingh
and Barry Leiba
* Added ASCII art versions of Venn diagrams
B.4. Draft-05 to -06
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
* Allowed for IETF 110 decision
* Resolved open issue
* Removed "future work" section
* Editorial improvements
B.5. Draft-04 to -05
* Adjusted criteria according to comments received
* Removed previous path 3
* Renumbered paths
* Updated diagrams
* Editorial improvements
B.6. Draft-03 to -04
* Adjusted criteria according to comments received
* Shortened period to one year (initially)
* Renumbered paths
* Updated diagrams
* Editorial improvements
B.7. Draft-02 to -03
* Adjusted criteria according to comments received
* Added data
B.8. Draft-01 to -02
* Made this an RFC 3933 process experiment
* Eliminated path based on directorate reviews, used to be: "Has
submitted at least 6 reviews as a member of an official IETF
review team within the last 3 years."
* Other comments from IETF107 virtual gendispatch meeting handled
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Additional Eligibility Criteria January 2021
B.9. Draft-00 to -01
* Added author
Authors' Addresses
Brian E. Carpenter
The University of Auckland
School of Computer Science
PB 92019
Auckland 1142
New Zealand
Email: brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com
Stephen Farrell
Trinity College Dublin
College Green
Dublin
Ireland
Email: stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie
Carpenter & Farrell Expires 5 July 2021 [Page 13]