Subject: The desires of the IETF community

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 04:17:34 -0800

Hello,

I'll list the properties sought as:

  (i)   Open

  (ii)  Fair

There will be sessions at IETF 86 where anyone can say whatever he or 
she wishes.  That takes care of the first property.

It is not possible to determine what is fair.  Each and everyone has 
to decide for himself/herself.  However, it is unfair for the 
individuals on NomCom 2012, the IAB, the IESG and the candidates as 
their actions are constrained by rules or practices.  What if there 
is an environment where the individuals can interact in good faith 
while taking BCP 10 into consideration?

NomCom 2012 has to get an understanding of the IETF community's 
consensus of the qualifications required.  There isn't any rule which 
restricts NomCom from having a session at IETF 86 to listen to the 
desires of the IETF community.  There isn't any rule which restricts 
individuals who happen to be on NomCom 2012 from asking clarifying 
question.  There isn't any rule which restricts individuals who 
happen to be on the IAB from asking clarifying questions.  There 
isn't any rule which restricts individuals who are candidates from 
asking clarifying questions.

Once NomCom 2012 has an understanding of the qualifications required 
it can talk to any possible candidate, even if the person is not on 
the current list.  Note that NomCom 2012 does not have to disclose 
the qualities which it will consider to select a candidate.

If the NomCom 2012 concludes that there isn't any confirmed candidate 
yet it can announce that.  After all, it is not a surprise to anyone 
to hear that there isn't any confirmed candidate at the 
moment.  NomCom 2012 can also report the difficulties it encountered 
separately.

The TSVAREA session can then be used to discuss about the 
difficulties and how IESG operations will be affected.

I attempted to separate two questions, qualifications required and 
what to do about the position.  As I don't have much time to write 
this message I may be missing some points.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

---

From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 13:25:08 +0000

You need at least two more properties

  (iii) High technical standard products

  (iv) Efficient

All the openness and fairness in the world is no use if it produces bad products,
or if it produces little or no product, or product so late it's no use.

(That wording is tailored to protocols etc. There are similar properties for an AD,
just worded slightly differently.)

-- 
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer, Communications Group
Communications, Networks and Image Analysis Capability
BAE Systems Advanced Technology Centre
West Hanningfield Road, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, CM2 8HN, UK
Tel: +44 1245 242194 |  Fax: +44 1245 242124
[email-masked] | http://www.baesystems.com

BAE Systems (Operations) Limited
Registered Office: Warwick House, PO Box 87, Farnborough Aerospace Centre, Farnborough, Hants, GU14 6YU, UK
Registered in England & Wales No: 1996687

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy
Sent: 08 March 2013 12:18
To: [email-masked]
Subject: The desires of the IETF community

----------------------! WARNING ! ----------------------
This message originates from outside our organisation,
either from an external partner or from the internet.
Keep this in mind if you answer this message.
Follow the 'Report Suspicious Emails' link on IT matters
for instructions on reporting suspicious email messages.
--------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

  (i)   Open

  (ii)  Fair

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 06:13:37 -0800

Hi Christopher,
>just worded slightly differently.)

And that is why it is up to the IETF community to express its desires.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

---

From: t.p. <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 14:48:53 +0000

----- Original Message -----
From: "S Moonesamy" <[email-masked]>
To: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2013 2:13 PM
> And that is why it is up to the IETF community to express its desires.

How (apart from posting to this list)?

Tom Petch

---

From: S Moonesamy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 07:01:00 -0800

Hi Tom,
>How (apart from posting to this list)?

Talk to the individuals who are part of NomCom 2012.  It's easier to 
discuss face to face.  There is also an email address ( 
[email-masked] ) to reach NomCom.  I have no doubt that NomCom 
2012 would appreciate any constructive input.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 17:48:08 -0800

> 2012 would appreciate any constructive input.

Mailing list to reach NomCom 2012 is [email-masked].
[email-masked] reaches only (surprise) the NomCom chair (Matt).

No idea why its not explicitly mentionon www.ietf.org/nomcom,
i have seen it mentioned multiple times on these mailing lists.

Cheers
    Toerless