Subject: Protocol Action: IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall to BCP

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 09:01:36 -0500

The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft 'IAB and IESG Selection,
Confirmation, and Recall' <draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2-01.txt> as a
BCP.

In the same action, the IESG approved publication of Publicly
Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection <draft-eastlake-selection-04.txt> as
an Informational RFC.

These documents are the product of the Process for Organization of
Internet Standards ONgoing Working Group.

The IESG contact person is Fred Baker.

Technical Summary
 
 IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall documents the process
 by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected, confirmed, and
 recalled is specified.  This document is a self- consistent, organized
 compilation of the process as it was known at the time of
 publication.

 Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection describes a method for
 making random selections in such a way that the unbiased nature of the
 choice is  publicly verifiable. As an example, the selection of the
 voting members of the IETF Nominations Committee from the pool of
 eligible volunteers is used.  Similar techniques would be applicable
 to other cases.

Protocol Quality
 
 This draft was reviewed for utility and representation of the known
 process by Randy Bush.

Note to RFC Editor

The IESG requests the RFC Editor to make two minor editing changes before
publishing draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2:

1. In Section 2, subsection (6), the last paragraph should be changed 
   from:

	It is consistent with this rule for nominating committee
	members who have served on prior nominating committees to 
	advise the current committee on the deliberations and results of 
	the prior committee, as necessary and appropriate.

   to:

	It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee
	members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise 
	the current committee on the deliberations and results of the 
	prior committee, as necessary and appropriate.

2. In Section 3, subsection (7), the text "in favor of a specific 
   outcome." should be appended at the end of the second paragraph. The 
   end result will be:

	   A method is fair if each eligible volunteer is equally likely 
	   to be selected. A method is unbiased if no one can influence 
	   its outcome in favor of a specific outcome.