Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility
draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-10
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2021-02-01
|
10 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48 |
2021-01-29
|
10 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 from RFC-EDITOR |
2021-01-20
|
10 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT |
2021-01-11
|
10 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to EDIT |
2021-01-11
|
10 | (System) | IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent |
2021-01-11
|
10 | (System) | Announcement was received by RFC Editor |
2021-01-11
|
10 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IANA Actions from In Progress |
2021-01-11
|
10 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2021-01-11
|
10 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent |
2021-01-11
|
10 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2021-01-11
|
10 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2021-01-11
|
10 | Amy Vezza | Ballot approval text was generated |
2021-01-11
|
10 | Amy Vezza | Ballot writeup was changed |
2021-01-08
|
10 | Alissa Cooper | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::AD Followup |
2021-01-07
|
10 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-10.txt |
2021-01-07
|
10 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2021-01-07
|
10 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2021-01-07
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent::AD Followup from IESG Evaluation |
2021-01-07
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2021-01-07
|
09 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Magnus Westerlund |
2021-01-07
|
09 | Martin Vigoureux | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Martin Vigoureux |
2021-01-06
|
09 | Erik Kline | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Erik Kline |
2021-01-06
|
09 | Benjamin Kaduk | [Ballot comment] Section 2 … [Ballot comment] Section 2 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. [...] (side note) I could imagine a scenario where the answers for some of these points/questions might change between the NomCom being seated and the completion of their work ... but I do not propose changing the timeline. The IESG will determine and announce the consensus of this discussion in good time for the 2022-2023 Nominating Committee cycle to commence. We may have to admit the possibility of lack of consensus ("results of the consensus determination"), to avoid being in an impossible state where consensus is absent, but is required before starting the 2022-2023 NomCom, but the timeline requires starting it. |
2021-01-06
|
09 | Benjamin Kaduk | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Benjamin Kaduk |
2021-01-06
|
09 | Éric Vyncke | [Ballot comment] Thank you for the work put into this document. My YES ballot is really a loud YES ;-) It is really critical to … [Ballot comment] Thank you for the work put into this document. My YES ballot is really a loud YES ;-) It is really critical to continue to have a fair process for NomCom. Special thanks as well to Robert & Carsten. Please find below one some non-blocking COMMENT points (but replies would be appreciated), and some nits. I hope that this helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric == COMMENTS == -- Abstract -- "The experiment is of fixed duration and will apply to one, or at most two, consecutive Nominating Committee cycles." To be on the safe side, should the cycle be explicit enumerated (like in section 2) ? -- Section 2 -- Just curious about why the IESG should only consult the NomCom chairs and not the NomCom members (including non-voting members == liaisons) ? The intent of this document is really critical, so, I would have assumed that the more source of information, the better. -- Section 3 -- In the first bullet, should the term "active participants" be defined? Perhaps a forward reference to section 4 ? -- Section 4 -- Path 1: Honestly, I find the criteria of "for at least one session of an online IETF meeting." a little weak... The bar is really low in this case (registering for one day and attending one WG session). Path 2: could we add directorate chairs to the mix ? -- Section 7 -- Semi-seriously, I do consider this document as improving the security of the Internet by keeping the diversity and effectiveness of NomCom. == NITS == -- Section 1 -- I am afraid that I cannot parse "assumed when that document was approved to be face-to-face meetings" (possibly because English is not my native language). |
2021-01-06
|
09 | Éric Vyncke | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Éric Vyncke |
2021-01-05
|
09 | Roman Danyliw | [Ballot comment] Thank you to Dan Harkins for the SECDIR review. |
2021-01-05
|
09 | Roman Danyliw | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Roman Danyliw |
2021-01-05
|
09 | Alvaro Retana | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alvaro Retana |
2021-01-04
|
09 | Martin Duke | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Martin Duke |
2021-01-04
|
09 | Deborah Brungard | [Ballot comment] Timely - much thanks for doing! |
2021-01-04
|
09 | Deborah Brungard | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Deborah Brungard |
2021-01-04
|
09 | Robert Wilton | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Robert Wilton |
2021-01-04
|
09 | Murray Kucherawy | [Ballot comment] I'm glad this is happening. I tried but failed a couple of times in the past to do this, so I'm glad someone … [Ballot comment] I'm glad this is happening. I tried but failed a couple of times in the past to do this, so I'm glad someone managed to get it done. Just one thing to clarify: "approved drafts" refers to an I-D that the IESG has balloted on and approved but hasn't yet been published as an RFC, correct? |
2021-01-04
|
09 | Murray Kucherawy | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Murray Kucherawy |
2021-01-03
|
09 | Barry Leiba | [Ballot comment] Enthusiastic “Yes” here, and thanks for the work on this. I have one minor, no-big-deal comment: * Path 3: Has been a … [Ballot comment] Enthusiastic “Yes” here, and thanks for the work on this. I have one minor, no-big-deal comment: * 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. The last sentence seems superfluous, repetitive of the first sentence. I also suggest slight rewording so that the first and second sentences both emphasize the relevant dates: NEW * Path 3: Has been a listed author or editor (on the front page) of at least 2 IETF stream RFCs whose publication dates are 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. END Alternatively, perhaps this?: NEW * Path 3: Has been a listed author or editor (on the front page) of at least 2 IETF stream RFCs, published or approved and in the RFC Editor queue, within the last 5 years prior to the day the call for NomCom volunteers is sent to the community. For published RFCs, the relevant date is the date of publication. For documents in the RFC Editor queue, the relevant date is the date the draft was added to the RFC Editor queue. END |
2021-01-03
|
09 | Barry Leiba | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Barry Leiba |
2021-01-01
|
09 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from Version Changed - Review Needed |
2021-01-01
|
09 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
2021-01-01
|
09 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-09.txt |
2021-01-01
|
09 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2021-01-01
|
09 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-12-31
|
08 | Alissa Cooper | Ballot has been issued |
2020-12-31
|
08 | Alissa Cooper | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper |
2020-12-31
|
08 | Alissa Cooper | Created "Approve" ballot |
2020-12-31
|
08 | Alissa Cooper | IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for Writeup |
2020-12-31
|
08 | Alissa Cooper | Ballot writeup was changed |
2020-12-30
|
08 | (System) | IESG state changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call |
2020-12-28
|
08 | Ines Robles | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Ines Robles. Sent review to list. |
2020-12-17
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Dan Harkins. Submission of review completed at an earlier date. |
2020-12-14
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Dan Harkins. |
2020-12-08
|
08 | Amy Vezza | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2021-01-07 |
2020-12-07
|
08 | Bron Gondwana | Shepherding write up for draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand (1) This RFC is of type Experimental, and is a temporary update to a BCP (RFC8713) (2) Document … Shepherding write up for draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand (1) This RFC is of type Experimental, and is a temporary update to a BCP (RFC8713) (2) Document writeup Technical Summary: This document details an expanded set of rules for calculating eligibility for roles within the IETF. The rules are in the form of a time-limited experiment, which will revert to the previous rules at the end of the experient unless further action is taken. Working Group Summary: This is an A-D sponsored draft. There was significant discussion on the eligibility-discuss mailing list, particularly because of the disparate goals of participants. There are two key issues trying to be solved. One is dealing with the immediate circumstances which mean that in-person meetings are not viable. The other is that our current eligibility criteria bias towards those who are physically and financially able to travel in person to meetings, and exclude those who are unable or unwilling to physically travel. Due to the amount discussion, RFC8788 was created to deal with the immediate issue of the 2020 Nomcom, while this document was further debated. Despite having solved the immediate problem, it is still necessary to have an approach in place for future Nomcom and recall purposes, so this document represents both a compromise and a limitation in scope of that discussion to the areas where there was general agreement. In the absence of further action, this document will lapse after one nominating cycle. Document Quality: This document has been considerably workshopped on the list. It is ready to publish. An almost final version was reviewed by multiple past nomcom chairs and authors of related documents, leading to minor wording improvements but no change of intent. Personnel: Document Shepherd: Bron Gondwana Area Director: Alissa Cooper (3) The document shepherd has followed all the disussions on the list, attended all the (virtual) face-to-face meetings that discussed the draft, and contributed to the discussion. (4) The document has been very thoroughly reviewed with a high level of involvement, and data has been collected in order to test how it would have altered eligibility if it was in force for previous years. (5) The document has already been reviewed by people from a wide cross-section of the IETF and doesn't need any other reviews. (6) The document shepherd has no concerns about this document. (7) Both authors confirmed that they have no IPR to disclose. (8) No IPR disclosures have been posted. (9) There are some members of the IETF who would like to go further with this, but nobody had strong objections to running this experiment for next year. (10) Nobody has threatened to appeal. (11) idnits reports 4 lines which are 1 character too long due to the URL that they link to, but these should change during the editing process to be shorter as they point to draft names. (12) There are no technical reviews required. (13) All references are normative references to IETF documents. (14) There are no references awaiting publication. (15) There are no downwards references. (16) This document will change a process from BCP 10 for the period of the experiment. (17) This document does not make any requests of IANA. (18) N/A (19) There are no sections written in a formal language. (20) N/A |
2020-12-06
|
08 | Joel Halpern | Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Ready. Reviewer: Joel Halpern. Sent review to list. |
2020-12-03
|
08 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Joel Halpern |
2020-12-03
|
08 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Joel Halpern |
2020-12-03
|
08 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Ines Robles |
2020-12-03
|
08 | Min Ye | Request for Last Call review by RTGDIR is assigned to Ines Robles |
2020-12-03
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Dan Harkins |
2020-12-03
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Dan Harkins |
2020-12-02
|
08 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amanda Baber | (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Functions Operator has reviewed draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-08, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments: We … (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Functions Operator has reviewed draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-08, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments: We understand that this document doesn't require any registry actions. While it's often helpful for a document's IANA Considerations section to remain in place upon publication even if there are no actions, if the authors strongly prefer to remove it, we do not object. If this assessment is not accurate, please respond as soon as possible. Thank you, Amanda Baber Lead IANA Services Specialist |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Alvaro Retana | Requested Last Call review by RTGDIR |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2020-12-30): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: brong@fastmailteam.com, draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand@ietf.org, alissa@cooperw.in Reply-To: last-call@ietf.org Sender: Subject: … The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2020-12-30): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: brong@fastmailteam.com, draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand@ietf.org, alissa@cooperw.in Reply-To: last-call@ietf.org Sender: Subject: Last Call: (Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility) to Experimental RFC The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility' as Experimental RFC The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the last-call@ietf.org mailing lists by 2020-12-30. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. 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, Nominating Committee cycles. This document temporarily varies the rules in RFC 8713. The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | Last call was requested |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | Ballot approval text was generated |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | Ballot writeup was generated |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | Last call announcement was changed |
2020-12-02
|
08 | Amy Vezza | IESG process started in state Publication Requested |
2020-11-24
|
08 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-08.txt |
2020-11-24
|
08 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-11-24
|
08 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-11-13
|
07 | Alissa Cooper | IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication |
2020-11-12
|
07 | Bron Gondwana | Shepherding write up for draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand (1) This RFC is of type Experimental, and is a temporary update to a BCP (RFC8713) (2) Document … Shepherding write up for draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand (1) This RFC is of type Experimental, and is a temporary update to a BCP (RFC8713) (2) Document writeup Technical Summary: This document details an expanded set of rules for calculating eligibility for roles within the IETF. The rules are in the form of a time-limited experiment, which will revert to the previous rules at the end of the experient unless further action is taken. Working Group Summary: This is an A-D sponsored draft. There was significant discussion on the eligibility-discuss mailing list, particularly because of the disparate goals of participants. There are two key issues trying to be solved. One is dealing with the immediate circumstances which mean that in-person meetings are not viable. The other is that our current eligibility criteria bias towards those who are physically and financially able to travel in person to meetings, and exclude those who are unable or unwilling to physically travel. Due to the amount discussion, RFC8788 was created to deal with the immediate issue of the 2020 Nomcom, while this document was further debated. Despite having solved the immediate problem, it is still necessary to have an approach in place for future Nomcom and recall purposes, so this document represents both a compromise and a limitation in scope of that discussion to the areas where there was general agreement. In the absence of further action, this document will lapse after one nominating cycle. Document Quality: This document has been considerably workshopped on the list. It is ready to publish. An almost final version was reviewed by multiple past nomcom chairs and authors of related documents, leading to minor wording improvements but no change of intent. Personnel: Document Shepherd: Bron Gondwana Area Director: Alissa Cooper (3) The document shepherd has followed all the disussions on the list, attended all the (virtual) face-to-face meetings that discussed the draft, and contributed to the discussion. (4) The document has been very thoroughly reviewed with a high level of involvement, and data has been collected in order to test how it would have altered eligibility if it was in force for previous years. (5) The document has already been reviewed by people from a wide cross-section of the IETF and doesn't need any other reviews. (6) The document shepherd has no concerns about this document. (7) (8) No IPR disclosures have been posted. (9) There are some members of the IETF who would like to go further with this, but nobody had strong objections to running this experiment for next year. (10) Nobody has threatened to appeal. (11) idnits reports 4 lines which are 1 character too long due to the URL that they link to, but these should change during the editing process to be shorter as they point to draft names. (12) There are no technical reviews required. (13) All references are normative references to IETF documents. (14) There are no references awaiting publication. (15) There are no downwards references. (16) This document will change a process from BCP 10 for the period of the experiment. (17) This document does not make any requests of IANA. (18) N/A (19) There are no sections written in a formal language. (20) N/A |
2020-11-01
|
07 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-07.txt |
2020-11-01
|
07 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-11-01
|
07 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-10-13
|
06 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-06.txt |
2020-10-13
|
06 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-10-13
|
06 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-09-08
|
05 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-05.txt |
2020-09-08
|
05 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-09-08
|
05 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-09-03
|
04 | Alissa Cooper | Notification list changed to Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com> |
2020-09-03
|
04 | Alissa Cooper | Document shepherd changed to Bron Gondwana |
2020-09-03
|
04 | Alissa Cooper | Intended Status changed to Experimental from None |
2020-09-03
|
04 | Alissa Cooper | Stream changed to IETF from None |
2020-09-03
|
04 | Alissa Cooper | Shepherding AD changed to Alissa Cooper |
2020-08-27
|
04 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-04.txt |
2020-08-27
|
04 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-08-27
|
04 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-07-13
|
03 | Pete Resnick | Added to session: IETF-108: gendispatch Thu-1300 |
2020-07-01
|
03 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt |
2020-07-01
|
03 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-07-01
|
03 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-03-28
|
02 | Stephen Farrell | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-02.txt |
2020-03-28
|
02 | (System) | New version approved |
2020-03-28
|
02 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Brian Carpenter , Stephen Farrell |
2020-03-28
|
02 | Stephen Farrell | Uploaded new revision |
2020-03-17
|
01 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-01.txt |
2020-03-17
|
01 | (System) | New version accepted (logged-in submitter: Brian Carpenter) |
2020-03-17
|
01 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |
2020-03-17
|
00 | Pete Resnick | Added to session: IETF-107: gendispatch Wed-2140 |
2020-03-16
|
00 | Brian Carpenter | New version available: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-00.txt |
2020-03-16
|
00 | (System) | New version approved |
2020-03-16
|
00 | Brian Carpenter | Request for posting confirmation emailed to submitter and authors: Brian Carpenter |
2020-03-16
|
00 | Brian Carpenter | Uploaded new revision |