Re: Proposal from mstjohns: Pre-approval of RFC 2727bis

[hardie@qualcomm.com]

Would it be possible to say "follow the selection procedures for nomcom volunteers
as outlined in rfc2727bis" (since those are clear and uncontentious), but leave
the rest of it status quo ante?

Some of the other sections are under active DISCUSSion (Thomas Narten's issue
with the liaisons reporting back being the one that sticks in my mind.)  I'm still
a no-ob on this, and I'll go along with either way.  But if there is a middle ground
that gets us forward, maybe we should consider it.
				regards,
					Ted

At 11:54 PM +0200 10/08/2003, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
>Mike St. Johns has suggested that the IESG should approve the 2727bis document as-is, mostly, I think, in order to fix the nomcom selection that will occur on October 10.
>
>I think there's good reason for that, but also want to get the current issues with the document fixed before publication.
>
>I have an alternate suggestion - that the ISOC President instruct the nomcom chair to follow the instructions of 2727bis, accepting that some points will be clarified as part of the ongoing process.
>
>If the IESG agrees on that, and the ISOC BoT and ISOC President does not object, we can do it. But we have to decide by tomorrow.
>
>What do people think?
>
>NOTE: If I hear one person among the IESG + ISOC BoT Chair + ISOC President saying "NO, can't do", I dont' think we can do it. I'd also like to have people say "YES".
>
>Comments?
>
>                Harald