Subject: [Iasa20] IAB or IESG confirmation (was: Path forward on director sources?)

From: "Livingood, Jason" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:21:20 +0000

Michael raises an interesting question below - and suggests we simplify things by having either IAB or IESG do all of the confirmations. That means confirming both NomCom and LLC selections. 

Any opinions in favor or opposition to either IAB or IESG in this role?

Jason

On 6/22/18, 7:19 PM, "iasa20 on behalf of Michael Richardson" <[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:

    Livingood, Jason <[email-masked]> wrote:
        > Based on this, feedback on these options is helpful:
    
        > All options include these two people on the seven person board:
        > * 1 IETF Chair or delegate selected by the IESG
        > * 1 Appointed by the ISOC Board of Trustees
    
        > Option 1 – Two from LLC:
        > * 3 Appointed by the IETF NomCom, confirmed by the IESG
        > * 2 Appointed by the LLC board itself, confirmed by the IAB
    
        > Option 2 – One from LLC:
        > * 4 Appointed by the IETF NomCom, confirmed by the IESG
        > * 1 Appointed by the LLC board itself, confirmed by the IAB
    
    I can live with either option.
    I prefer option 2.
    
    I don't know why the confirmation process mentions both IESG and IAB.
    Pick one... In theory they are supposed to just make sure the process
    was followed, in practice, the confirming bodies seem to do an aweful
    lot more  (inappropriately, I believe, but that's another debate, and
    is water under the bridge. I don't think the bodies will change their
    behaviour in this regard)
    
    Org-chart wise, I think it should be the IAB, but a few current/former IESG
    members have made a case that the IESG is more connected, and I can be
    persuaded either way.  Just pick one.
    
    --
    Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
     -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 11:55:25 -0400

IESG confirming leaves the IAB free to be the appeals path...

On 6/25/2018 11:21 AM, Livingood, Jason wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20

---

From: Ted Hardie <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:36:03 -0700

> IESG confirming leaves the IAB free to be the appeals path...
Confirmations of appointments have not historically been subject to appeal
as far as I can tell.  Imagine for a moment that the IAB confirmation of
the IESG slate resulted in an appeal; the only possible appeal left would
be to the ISOC BoT.  Appeals to them are, however, limited in scope to
questions of whether the procedures are adequate, not of the decisions
themselves. This is the relevant text:

6.5.3 Questions of Applicable Procedure

   Further recourse is available only in cases in which the procedures
   themselves (i.e., the procedures described in this document) are
   claimed to be inadequate or insufficient to the protection of the
   rights of all parties in a fair and open Internet Standards Process.
   Claims on this basis may be made to the Internet Society Board of

Since neither the appellant nor the appeals body would have access to the
confidential information used in making a decision to select specific
candidates, any appeals body would have to be limited to questions of
process. Since part of the confirmation is the confirming body satisfying
itself that the process was followed by the selecting group, I don't think
a separate appeals body (with less information) makes much sense for this
or the typical NomCom appointments.

regards,

Ted

>> Michael raises an interesting question below - and suggests we simplify
>> things by having either IAB or IESG do all of the confirmations. That means
>> confirming both NomCom and LLC selections.
>>
>> On 6/22/18, 7:19 PM, "iasa20 on behalf of Michael Richardson" <
>> [email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:
>>

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:19:11 -0400

I was thinking iab for appeals of removal. I guess this doesn't need to be 
linked to the confirming body - so I guess it doesn't matter...

----------

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 14:22:41 -0500

Hi, Jason,

> Any opinions in favor or opposition to either IAB or IESG in this role?

I answered in favor of picking one, in the other thread - sorry I was
reading in thread order, and this one wasn't the first place I saw where
this was being discussed.

And thanks for asking.

Spencer

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 14:43:20 +1200

> Any opinions in favor or opposition to either IAB or IESG in this role?

It seems to me that the IESG is more directly a "customer" of the LLC,
so has more skin in the game, so I suggest the IESG as the confirming body.

I'd say the appeal path here is most likely a bulk recall; if the IESG
confirms bad directors, we're already in deep trouble.

   Brian

---

From: "Livingood, Jason" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 12:32:05 +0000

So closing on this; most folks agree to pick one or the other with a bit more support for IESG confirmation. I will make those changes in the latest I-D.

On 6/25/18, 10:43 PM, "iasa20 on behalf of Brian E Carpenter" <[email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:

    
    
       Brian

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 11:51:24 -0500

Jason,

On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 7:32 AM Livingood, Jason <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> So closing on this; most folks agree to pick one or the other with a bit
> more support for IESG confirmation. I will make those changes in the latest
> I-D.
>

Thanks for this.

Spencer

> On 6/25/18, 10:43 PM, "iasa20 on behalf of Brian E Carpenter" <
> [email-masked] on behalf of [email-masked]> wrote:
>
>     > Michael raises an interesting question below - and suggests we
> simplify things by having either IAB or IESG do all of the confirmations.
> That means confirming both NomCom and LLC selections.
>     >