home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group J. Galvin
- Request for Comments: 2282 eList eXpress LLC
- BCP: 10 February 1998
- Obsoletes: 2027
- Category: Best Current Practice
-
-
- IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process:
- Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
- Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
- improvements. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
-
- Copyright Notice
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
-
- Abstract
-
- The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected,
- confirmed, and recalled is specified. The evolution of the process
- has relied principally on oral tradition as a means by which the
- lessons learned could be passed on to successive committees. This
- document is a self-consistent, organized compilation of the process
- as it is known today.
-
- Table of Contents
-
- 1 Introduction ................................................. 1
- 2 General ...................................................... 2
- 3 Nominating Committee Selection ............................... 6
- 4 Nominating Committee Operation ............................... 7
- 5 Member Recall ................................................ 11
- 6 Changes From RFC2027 ......................................... 12
- 7 Security Considerations ...................................... 13
- 8 Editor's Address ............................................. 13
- 9 Full Copyright Statement ..................................... 14
-
- 1. Introduction
-
- This document supercedes RFC2027, the first complete specification of
- the process by which members of the IAB and IESG are selected,
- confirmed, and recalled. Prior to that time, a single paragraph in
- RFC1602 is the extent to which the process had been formally
- recorded.
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 1]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- This revision is based on the experience of the 1996 Nominating
- Committee, the first committee to operate according to RFC2027. The
- following two assumptions of that specification are also true for
- this revision.
-
- (1) The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and Internet Research
- Steering Group (IRSG) are not a part of the process described
- here.
-
- (2) The organization (and re-organization) of the IESG is not a
- part of the process described here.
-
- The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of
- reference. The time frames assume that the IETF meets at least once
- per year with that meeting occurring during the North American Spring
- time, i.e., the IETF meets at least on or about March of each year.
-
- The remainder of this document is divided into four major topics as
- follows.
-
- General
- This a set of rules and constraints that apply to the selection
- and confirmation process as a whole.
-
- Nominating Committee Selection
- This is the process by which volunteers from the IETF community
- are recognized to serve on the committee that nominates
- candidates to serve on the IESG and IAB.
-
- Nominating Committee Operation
- This is the set of principles, rules, and constraints that guide
- the activities of the nominating committee, including the
- confirmation process.
-
- Member Recall
- This is the process by which the behavior of a sitting member of
- the IESG or IAB may be questioned, perhaps resulting in the
- removal of the sitting member.
-
- A final section describes how this document differs from its
- predecessor: RFC2027.
-
- 2. General
-
- The following set of rules apply to the selection and confirmation
- process as a whole. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the
- interpretation of each rule is included.
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 2]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- (1) The principal functions of the nominating committee are to
- review the open IESG and IAB positions and to either nominate
- its incumbent or recruit a superior candidate.
-
- The nominating committee does not select the open positions to
- be reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review.
-
- At a minimum, the nominating committee will be given the title
- of the position to be reviewed. The nominating committee may be
- given a desirable set of qualifications for the candidate
- nominated to fill each position.
-
- Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they do not
- wish to be nominated.
-
- The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it
- presents its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as
- indicated below.
-
- (2) The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to
- be completed within 3 months.
-
- The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be
- completed one month prior to the friday of the week before the
- Spring IETF. It is expected to begin 4 months prior to the
- friday of the week before the Spring IETF.
-
- (3) One-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB positions is
- selected to be reviewed each year.
-
- The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately
- one-half of each of the sitting IESG and IAB members each year.
- It is recognized that circumstances may exist that will require
- the nominating committee to review more or less than one-half of
- the current positions, e.g., if the IESG or IAB have re-
- organized prior to this process and created new positions, or if
- there are an odd number current positions.
-
- (4) Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a 2 year
- term.
-
- The intent of this rule is to ensure that members of the IESG
- and IAB serve the number of years that best facilitates the
- review of one-half of the members each year.
-
- It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
- choose one or more of the currently open positions to which it
- may assign a term greater than 2 years in order to ensure the
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 3]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- ideal application of this rule in the future.
-
- It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
- choose one or more of the currently open positions that share
- responsibilities with other positions (both those being reviewed
- and those sitting) to which it may assign a term greater than 2
- years to ensure that all such members will not be reviewed at
- the same time.
-
- All member terms begin and end during the Spring IETF meeting
- corresponding to the end of the term for which they were
- confirmed. Normally, the confirmed candidate's term begins when
- the currently sitting member's term ends on the last day of the
- meeting. A term may begin or end no sooner than the first day
- of the meeeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the
- currently sitting member and the confirmed candidate.
-
- (5) Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented
- here with four qualifications. First, the most recently
- constituted nominating committee is reconvened to nominate a
- candidate to fill the vacancy. Second, the selection and
- confirmation process is expected to be completed within 1
- month, with all other time periods otherwise unspecified
- prorated accordingly. Third, the confirming body has two
- weeks from the day it is notified of a candidate to reject the
- candidate, otherwise the candidate is assumed to have been
- confirmed. Fourth, the term of the confirmed candidate will
- be either:
-
- a. the remainder of the term of the open position if that remainder
- is not less than one year.
-
- b. the remainder of the term of the open position plus the next 2
- year term if that remainder is less than one year.
-
- (6) All deliberations and supporting information that relates to
- specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are
- confidential.
-
- The nominating committee and confirming body members will be
- exposed to confidential information as a result of their
- deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and
- from those who provide requested supporting information. All
- members and all other participants are expected to handle this
- information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 4]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- (7) Unless otherwise specified, the advise and consent model is
- used throughout the process. This model is characterized as
- follows.
-
- a. The IETF Executive Director advises the nominating committee of
- the IESG and IAB positions to be reviewed.
-
- b. The nominating committee selects candidates and advises the
- confirming bodies of them.
-
- c. The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates, consenting
- to some, all, or none.
-
- If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the
- nominating committee with respect to reviewing the open IESG
- positions is considered complete. If some or none of the
- candidates are confirmed, the nominating committee must
- reconvene to select alternate candidates for the rejected
- candidates. Any additional time required by the nominating
- committee should not exceed its maximum time allotment.
-
- d. The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB
- candidates, consenting to some, all, or none.
-
- If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the
- nominating committee with respect to reviewing the open IAB
- positions is considered complete. If some or none of the
- candidates are confirmed, the nominating committee must
- reconvene to select alternate candidates for the rejected
- candidates. Any additional time required by the nominating
- committee should not exceed its maximum time allotment.
-
- e. The confirming bodies decide their consent according to a
- mechanism of their own choosing, which must ensure that at least
- one-half of the sitting members agree with the decision.
-
- At least one-half of the sitting members of the confirming
- bodies must agree to either confirm or reject each individual
- nominee. The agreement must be decided within a reasonable
- timeframe. The agreement may be decided by conducting a formal
- vote, by asserting consensus based on informal exchanges
- (email), or by whatever mechanism is used to conduct the normal
- business of the confirming body.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 5]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- 3. Nominating Committee Selection
-
- The following set of rules apply to the creation of the nominating
- committee and the selection of its members.
-
- (1) The committee is comprised of at least a non-voting Chair, 10
- voting volunteers, and 3 non-voting liaisons.
-
- A Chair is permitted to invite additional non-voting advisors to
- participate in some or all of the deliberations of the
- committee.
-
- (2) The Internet Society President appoints the non-voting Chair,
- who must meet the usual requirements for membership in the
- nominating committee.
-
- The nominating committee Chair must agree to invest the time
- necessary to complete the duties of the nominating committee and
- to perform in the best interests of the IETF community during
- the performance of those duties.
-
- (3) The Chair obtains the list of IESG and IAB positions to be
- reviewed and publishes it along with a solicitation for names
- of volunteers from the IETF community willing to serve on the
- nominating committee.
-
- The list of open positions is published with the solicitation to
- facilitate community members choosing between volunteering for
- an open position and volunteering for the nominating committee.
-
- The list and solicitation must be publicized using at least the
- same mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its
- announcements.
-
- (4) Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of
- the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer.
-
- (5) Internet Society Board of Trustees, sitting members of the
- IAB, and sitting members of the IESG may not volunteer.
-
- (6) The Chair announces the pool of volunteers from which the 10
- voting volunteers will be randomly selected.
-
- The announcement must be made using at least the same mechanism
- used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 6]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- (7) The Chair randomly selects the 10 voting voluteers from the
- pool of names of volunteers using a method that can be
- independently verified to be unbiased and fair.
-
- A method is fair if each eligible volunteer is equally likely to
- be selected. A method is unbiased if no one can influence its
- outcome.
-
- The method must include an announcement of an enumerated list of
- the pool of names together with the specific algorithm for how
- names will be chosen from the list. The output of the selection
- algorithm must depend on random data whose value is not known at
- the time the list and algorithm are announced.
-
- One possible method is to compute the MD5 hash of future winning
- lottery numbers and use the result to select names from the
- list.
-
- All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used
- by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.
-
- (8) The sitting IAB and IESG members each appoint a non-voting
- liaison to the nominating committee from their current
- membership who are not sitting in an open position.
-
- (9) The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as a
- non-voting liaison.
-
- The prior year's Chair may designate an alternate voting member
- from the prior year's committee if the Chair is unavailable. If
- the prior year's Chair is unavailable and is unable or unwilling
- to make such a designation in a timely fashion, the Chair of the
- current committee may do so.
-
- (10) The Chair may solicit additional non-voting liaisons from
- other organizations, who must meet the usual requirements for
- membership in the nominating committee.
-
- 4. Nominating Committee Operation
-
- The following rules apply to the operation of the nominating
- committee. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation
- of each rule is included.
-
- The rules are organized approximately in the order in which they
- would be invoked.
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 7]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- The term nominee refers to an individual under consideration by the
- nominating committee. The term candidate refers to a nominee that
- has been selected by the nominating committee to be considered for
- confirmation by a confirming body. A confirmed candidate is a
- candidate that has been reviewed and approved by a confirming body.
-
- (1) All rules and special circumstances not otherwise specified
- are at the discretion of the Chair.
-
- Exceptional circumstances will occasionally arise during the
- normal operation of the nominating committee. This rule is
- intended to foster the continued forward progress of the
- committee. All members of the committee should consider whether
- the exception is worthy of mention in the next revision of this
- document and followup accordingly.
-
- (2) The Chair must establish and publicize milestones, which must
- include at least a call for nominations.
-
- There is a defined time period during which the selection and
- confirmation process must be completed. The Chair must
- establish a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion,
- will result in the completion of the process on time. The Chair
- should allow time for iterating the activities of the committee
- if one or more candidates is not confirmed.
-
- The milestones must be publicized using at least the same
- mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.
-
- (3) The Chair must establish a voting mechanism.
-
- The committee must be able to objectively determine when a
- decision has been made during its deliberations. The criteria
- for determining closure must be established and known to all
- members of the nominating committee.
-
- (4) At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a
- vote. A quorum is comprised of at least 7 voting members.
-
- (5) The Chair may establish a process by which a member of the
- nominating committee may be recalled.
-
- The process, if established, must be agreed to by a 3/4 majority
- of the members of the nominating committee, including the non-
- voting members since they would be subject to the same process.
-
- (6) All members of the nominating committee may participate in all
- deliberations.
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 8]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- The emphasis of this rule is that no member, whether voting or
- non-voting, can be explicitly excluded from any deliberation.
- However, a member may individually choose not to participate in
- a deliberation.
-
- (7) The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed and the
- call for nominees.
-
- The call for nominees must include a request for comments
- regarding the past performance of incumbents, which will be
- considered during the deliberations of the nominating committee.
-
- The announcements must be publicized using at least the same
- mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.
-
- (8) Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of
- the IETF community for any open position.
-
- A self-nomination is permitted.
-
- (9) Nominating committee members must not be nominees.
-
- To be a nominee is to enter the process of being selected as a
- candidate and confirmed. Nominating committee members are not
- eligible to be considered for filling any open position.
-
- (10) Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG
- or IAB position during the previous two years must not be
- nominees.
-
- (11) The nominating committee selects candidates based on its
- understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the
- qualifications required to fill the open positions.
-
- The intent of this rule is to ensure that the nominating
- committee consults with a broad base of the IETF community for
- input to its deliberations.
-
- The consultations are permitted to include a slate of nominees,
- if all parties to the consultation agree to observe customary
- and reasonable rules of confidentiality.
-
- A broad base of the community should include the existing
- members of the IAB and IESG, especially sitting members who
- share responsibilities with open positions, e.g., co-Area
- Directors.
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 9]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- (12) Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and
- must consent to their nomination prior to being confirmed.
-
- The nominating committee should help nominees provide
- justification to their employers.
-
- A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and
- include a commitment to provide the resources necessary to fill
- the open position and an assurance that the nominee will perform
- the duties of the position for which they are being considered
- in the best interests of the IETF community.
-
- (13) The nominating committee advises the confirming bodies of
- their candidates, specifying a single candidate for each open
- position and a testament as to how each candidate meets the
- qualifications of an open position.
-
- The testament may include a brief resume of the candidate and a
- summary of the deliberations of the nominating committee.
-
- (14) With respect to any action to be taken in the context of
- notifying and announcing confirmed candidates, and notifying
- rejected nominees and candidates, the action must be valid
- according to all of the rules specified below prior to its
- execution.
-
- a. Up until a candidate is confirmed, the identity of the candidate
- must be kept confidential.
-
- b. The identity of all nominees must be kept confidential (except
- that the nominee may publicize their intentions).
-
- c. Rejected nominees may be notified as soon as they are rejected.
-
- d. Rejected candidates may be notified as soon as they are
- rejected.
-
- e. Rejected nominees and candidates must be notified prior to
- announcing confirmed candidates.
-
- f. Confirmed candidates may be notified and announced as soon as
- they are confirmed.
-
- It is consistent with these rules for a nominee to never know if
- they were a candidate or not.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 10]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- It is consistent with these rules for some nominees to be
- rejected early in the process and for some nominees to be kept
- as alternates in case a candidate is rejected by a confirming
- body. In the matter of whether a confirmed candidate was a
- first choice or an alternate, that information need not ever be
- disclosed and, in fact, probably never should be.
-
- It is consistent with these rules for confirmed candidates to be
- notified and announced as quickly as possible instead of
- requiring all confirmed candidates to wait until all open
- positions have been reviewed.
-
- When consulting with individual members of the IETF community,
- if all parties to the consultation agree to observe customary
- and reasonable rules of confidentiality the consultations are
- permitted to include a slate of nominees.
-
- The announcements must be publicized using at least the same
- mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.
-
- 5. Member Recall
-
- The following rules apply to the recall process. If necessary, a
- paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included.
-
- (1) Anyone may request the recall of any sitting IAB or IESG
- member, at any time, upon written (email is acceptable)
- request with justification to the Internet Society President.
-
- (2) Internet Society President shall appoint a Recall Committee
- Chair.
-
- The Internet Society President must not evaluate the recall
- request. It is explicitly the responsibility of the IETF
- community to evaluate the behavior of its leaders.
-
- (3) The recall committee is created according to the same rules as
- is the nominating committee with the qualifications that the
- person being investigated and the person requesting the recall
- must not be a member of the recall committee in any capacity.
-
- (4) The recall committee operates according to the same rules as
- the nominating committee with the qualification that there is
- no confirmation process.
-
- (5) The recall committee investigates the circumstances of the
- justification for the recall and votes on its findings.
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 11]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- The investigation must include at least both an opportunity for
- the member being recalled to present a written statement and
- consultation with third parties.
-
- (6) A 3/4 majority of the members who vote on the question is
- required for a recall.
-
- (7) If a sitting member is recalled the open position is to be
- filled according to the mid-term vacancy rules.
-
- 6. Changes From RFC2027
-
- (1) In order to foster better communication between nominating
- committees from one year to the next the Chair of each year's
- committee has been added as a non-voting liaison of the next
- year's committee.
-
- (2) In order to confirm the eligibility of each volunteer in the
- pool of names from which nominating committee members are
- chosen the Chair must announce the list prior to the random
- selection.
-
- (3) In order to confirm the random selection process used to
- select voting nominating committee members the Chair must
- announce the fair and unbiased method used in advance of its
- execution.
-
- (4) Some guidance was added to ensure that the nominating
- committee consults with a broad base of the IETF community.
-
- (5) Some guidance was added to ensure that the nominating
- committee understands that it may name prospective nominees
- when consulting with individual members of the IETF community.
-
- (6) Some guidance was added to ensure that the nominating
- committee understands that it is responsible for ensuring that
- an appropriate set of one-half of each of the IESG and IAB
- positions are reviewed each year.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 12]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- 7. Security Considerations
-
- Any selection, confirmation, or recall process necessarily involves
- investigation into the qualifications and activities of prospective
- candidates. The investigation may reveal confidential or otherwise
- private information about candidates to those participating in the
- process. Each person who participates in any aspect of the process
- has a responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of any and all
- information not explicitly identified as suitable for public
- dissemination.
-
- 8. Editor's Address
-
- James M. Galvin
- eList eXpress LLC
- PO Box 220
- Glenwood, MD, 21738
-
- EMail: galvin@elistx.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 13]
-
- RFC 2282 IAB and IESG Selection February 1998
-
-
- 9. Full Copyright Statement
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
-
- This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
- others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
- or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
- and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
- kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
- included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
- document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
- the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
- Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
- developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
- copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
- followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
- English.
-
- The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
- revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
-
- This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
- "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
- TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
- BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
- HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
- MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Galvin Best Current Practice [Page 14]
-
-