Nomcom WG IETF55 Atlanta USA 20 Nov 2002

Agenda State of draft-ietf-nomcom-rfc2727bis-02.txt (30) Open Issues (120)

Changes Between Draft-01 and Draft-02 (1) The term of the nominating committee was extended to approximately 15 months such that it explicitly overlaps by approximately 3 months the next year's nominating committee's term. The terms voting member and non-voting member were replaced by voting volunteers, liaisons, and advisors. All members vote at all times except that only voting volunteers vote on a candidate selection.

Changes Between Draft-01 and Draft-02 (2) Details regarding the expected timeline of the operation of the committee were made even more explicit. An Appendix was added that captures all the details for the convenience of the reader. The responsibilities of the Chair, liaisons, advisors, and voting volunteers are now explicitly stated. Some additional clarification of the random selection process was added.

Changes Between Draft-01 and Draft-02 (3) A process for recalling members of the committee excluding the Chair was added A process for recalling the Chair of the committee was added. A dispute resolution process for addressing process concerns was added.

Open Issues Qualification for volunteering Number of participants from a single group or company Should there be a process for resolving challenges over volunteer selection Mid term vacancy procedures Recall procedure

Qualification for volunteering Is 2 out of 3 rule sufficient? Should there be 2 pools –Pool of volunteer wg chair, past i*s, editors etc.. –Pool of 2 out of 3 volunteers –With the possilbe addition that after selecting x% from pool 1, the remainder of pool 1 is folded into pool 2 (removing duplicates of course) and the remiender of the volunteers are selected. Should qualification include Big-N ever attendance at an IETF meeting Or move to a draft

Alternative to Volunteering Treat it like jury duty in the US. –Put all names of eligible ietf participants into the pool –Use random procedure to pick 10 from that pool

Number of participants from a single group or company Appears to be a consensus on limiting to a maximum of 2 Procedure and definition still under discussion. Current approximation: –Strict definition of a control group –Volunteers indicate their control group(s) when volunteering –Process whereby first 2 from control group are accepted, others are passed over. Question of whether other diversity (or lack thereof) factors should be considered.

Control group definition (i)Definition of Control Group. A "Control Group" shall be defined as all corporations or other entities which are Controlled by any entity (whether or not such entity is a member of the Corporation), which Control any entity (whether or not such entity is a member of the Corporation), or which are under common control with any entity (whether or not such entity is a member of the Corporation). "Control" shall mean the ownership of more than 50% of the total securities representing the voting power of another entity; or in the absence of voting securities, 50% or more of the voting rights of the entity. (ii)(ii) Prohibitions on Multiple Directors of the Same Membership Class. No more than two (2) individuals employed by, or performing monetarily compensated services for, a Control Group shall be permitted to serve as Directors of the Corporation at the same time.

Should there be a process for resolving challenges over volunteer selection Time is allowed for challenge. No process indicated. If control group notion is added, challenges might be more likely. Is this left up to Nomcom chair with defined escalation procedure handling any irresolvable issues?

Mid term vacancy procedures The term of the nomcom is 15 months. –During the 3 months when the terms of an outgoing and an incoming nomcom overlap, the outgoing nomcom would only be used to fill a mid term vacancy. –The nomcoms would be isolated from each other; i.e. they would not share information. –The outgoing Nomcom must fill mid-term vacancies within 6 weeks of being given the task. To few comments to determine consensus yet.

Recall procedure Currently susceptible to DOS attack –1 person sufficient to trigger entire procedure Recommended change: –Require a petition signed by N qualified individuals to trigger procedure –N = 2% of the average attendance over the last 3 IETF meeting –Qualified individual – someone qualified to serve on nomcom