Comments on draft-ietf-nomcom-rfc2727bis

[Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com]

I have a bunch of comments on the nomcom draft (attached).  I have
divided them into substantive and editorial comments, but I haven't
decided whether or not to register a discuss for my substantive 
comments, as I haven't read everyone else's comments

Margaret


SUBSTANTIVE (more or less):

>Abstract
>
>   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.

Very weak...  I also don't think that the last sentence is true,
as this document changes some things.

>In section 2:
>      The nominating committee will be given the title of the positions
>      to be reviewed and a brief description of the desirable set of
>      qualifications of the candidate that is nominated to fill each
>      position.

Is this information sent publicly or privately?

>  4.  Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a 2 year
>      term.

This isn't always true.  Replacement candidates may serve
terms of less than two years.

>      A term may begin or end no sooner than the
>      first day of the meeting and no later than the last day of the
>      meeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the currently
>      sitting member and the confirmed candidate. The confirmed
>      candidate's term may overlap the sitting member's term during the
>      meeting as determined by their mutual agreement.

How does this apply to IAB terms?  In the case where there is
more than one new IAB member, I don't think that it is
defined which IAB member each new member is replacing.


>From section 3, subsection 8:
>      It is consistent with these rules for the announcements of a
>      resignation, of the existence of a mid-term vacancy, and of the
>      confirmed candidates to all occur at the same time as long as the
>      actual sequence of events that occurred did so in the following
>      order.
>
>      *  The nominating committee completes the advice and consent
>         process for the candidate already sitting on another body.
>
>      *  The newly confirmed candidate resigns from their current
>         position.
>
>      *  The body with the new mid-term vacancy requests that the
>         nominating committee fill the position.
>
>      *  The Executive Director of the IETF informs the nominating
>         committee of the mid-term vacancy.
>
>      *  The nominating committee acts on the request to fill the
>         mid-term vacancy

>From my reading, this means that a position can be vacated and
filled without any community awareness that the position was
ever open...  Would there be a public call for nominations?

It seems to me that we need _some_ public step in here.  For
example, when the Executive Director informs the nomcom of
the vacancy, perhaps that should be public?  Or, perhaps we
should state that there is a public call for nominations?

Also, we seem to be skipping the step where the body supplies
the qualifications desired in a candidate...  Is it intended
that this could happen without the body being informed.

For example:  If a <foo> area director is nominated, selected
and confirmed for an IAB position, will the IESG be informed
of the opening and asked to provide qualifications for a new
candidate?  Will the community be aware that the IESG seat
needs to be filled?  Will there be a public call for 
nominations for the position?


EDITORIAL:

The section numbering in this document doesn't match usual
conventions.

>       A superior candidate is one who the nominating committee believes
>       would contribute in such a way as to improve or enhance the body
>       to which he or she is nominated.

Why define this here, instead of in the definitions section?

>  3.  One-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB positions is
>      selected to be reviewed each year.

s/One-half of each of/One-half of/
s/positions is/positions are/

>      The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately
>      one-half of each of the IESG and IAB sitting members each year.

s/one-half of each of/one-half of/

>In section 4, subsection 7:
>        Liaisons from the IESG, IAB, and Internet Society Board of
>        Trustees are expected to review the operation and executing
>        process of the nominating committee and to report any concerns

There is a mention here of a liaison from the ISOC board.
But, the previous list of nomcom members doesn't include this
liaison...

>Also from section 4:
>   2.   The term of a nominating committee is expected to be 15 months.
>
>        It is the intent of this rule that the end of a nominating
>        committee's term overlap by approximately three months the
>        beginning of the term of the next nominating committee.
>
>        The term of a nominating committee begins when its members are
>        officially announced.  The term ends at the Third IETF (not
>        three meetings) after the next nominating committee's term
>        begins.
>
>        A term is expected to begin at least two months prior to the
>        Third IETF to ensure the nominating committee has at least one
>        month to get organized before preparing for the Third IETF.

This section isn't consistent.  If the term begins two months
before the "third IETF" and ends at the following "third IETF",
it is only 14 months long.

The organization of this document seems to result in repeating
a lot of information.