Subject: RE: Experimentation and nomcom space

From: Christian Huitema <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2002 23:13:46 -0700

> > fwiw - I'm not seeing a consensus to change our current process
> > to publish names, or, if names were to be published, just what
> > the process would be
> > 
> > since we have running code I would expect that we need a good
> > consensus to change the current rules even for one year
> 
> what he says.  
> 
> imiho, change for the appearance of change or flexibility is not
> constructive in the long run.  we should act deliberately, i.e.
> with deliberation.

Ditto. I have yet to see a clear definition of the problem that we are
trying to fix. I have merely seen allusion to people feeling left in the
dark, but I did not observe any expression of such sentiment on the IETF
mailing list last spring, or for that matter in the previous years. (OK,
it occurred once, many years ago, and the process actually fixed
itself.) People who perhaps feel "disenfranchised" have a simple remedy
-- volunteer! That being said, it is better to just keep the working
code.

-- Christian Huitema

---

From: Randy Bush <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 02:29:03 -0700

oddly, what we seem not to be doing, at least visibly, is acting even
temporarily on the one item on which there seems to be considerable
consensus.  start the nomcom process considerably earlier.  i wonder
if there is something we can do to help this, as opposed to just me
whining.

randy

---

From: avri <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 19:03:45 +0900

Hi,

There was a  sense of the room that the new timing as outlined in the
current draft should be clarified and then passed on to the chair
of ISOC with a recommendation that it be used in this years process.

This sense of the room was based on:
- the probability of getting the new RFC out in time for this year's
Nomcom was slight
- the timing was not in direct contradication to the current RFC.
- as you say this seems an important thing to do.

So, as long there is rough consensus on this list for doing so, the
timescale will be clarified, sent to this list and the ISOC chair will
be notified of the recommentation.

a.

Randy Bush wrote:

> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>
> 

-- 
Avri Doria

Institute for System Technology   Mobile: +46 73 029 8019
Lulea University of Technology    Office: +46 920 49 3030
SE 971-87 Lulea                   In US:  +1 401 663 5024
Sweden                            [email-masked]

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 12:14:06 +0200

> if there is something we can do to help this, as opposed to just me

I thought the draft on the table did do that. If not,
I'm whining with you.

  Brian

---

From: Geoff Huston <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:19:00 +1000

>if there is something we can do to help this, as opposed to just me

For the coming year the necessary steps are for the ISOC V-P of Standards 
to name the Nomcom chair in the coming week or two (assuming that, as 
usual, this is well in hand and its just a case of making the announcement) 
and some assistance to the chair to get out the call for nomcom member 
volunteers immediately would get the nomcom process off and running.

Because of the earlier IETF meeting in November this year the Nomcom will 
need to get off and running quickly in any case if it wants to be in the 
best position to use the IETF time as productively as possible.

Geoff