[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Protocol Action: IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall to BCP
The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'IAB and IESG Selection,
Confirmation, and Recall' <draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2-01.txt> as a
BCP.
In the same action, the IESG approved publication of Publicly
Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection <draft-eastlake-selection-04.txt> as
an Informational RFC.
These documents are the product of the Process for Organization of
Internet Standards ONgoing Working Group.
The IESG contact person is Fred Baker.
Technical Summary
IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall documents the process
by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected, confirmed, and
recalled is specified. This document is a self- consistent, organized
compilation of the process as it was known at the time of
publication.
Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection describes a method for
making random selections in such a way that the unbiased nature of the
choice is publicly verifiable. As an example, the selection of the
voting members of the IETF Nominations Committee from the pool of
eligible volunteers is used. Similar techniques would be applicable
to other cases.
Protocol Quality
This draft was reviewed for utility and representation of the known
process by Randy Bush.
Note to RFC Editor
The IESG requests the RFC Editor to make two minor editing changes before
publishing draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2:
1. In Section 2, subsection (6), the last paragraph should be changed
from:
It is consistent with this rule for nominating committee
members who have served on prior nominating committees to
advise the current committee on the deliberations and results of
the prior committee, as necessary and appropriate.
to:
It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee
members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise
the current committee on the deliberations and results of the
prior committee, as necessary and appropriate.
2. In Section 3, subsection (7), the text "in favor of a specific
outcome." should be appended at the end of the second paragraph. The
end result will be:
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 in favor of a specific outcome.