





Network Working Group                                           J. Galvin
Request for Comments: 2727                              eList eXpress LLC
BCP: 10                                                     February 2000
Obsoletes: 2282
Category: Best Current Practice


       IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process:
           Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees

Status of this Memo

   This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the
   Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   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.

Table of Contents

   1 Introduction .................................................    1
   2 General ......................................................    2
   3 Nominating Committee Selection ...............................    6
   4 Nominating Committee Operation ...............................    8
   5 Member Recall ................................................   11
   6 Changes From RFC2282 .........................................   12
   7 Acknowledgements .............................................   13
   8 Security Considerations ......................................   14
   9 References ...................................................   14
   10 Editor's Address ............................................   14
   11 Full Copyright Statement ....................................   15

1.  Introduction

   This document is a revision of and supercedes RFC2282.  It is a
   complete specification of the process by which members of the IAB and
   IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled as of the date of its
   approval.  However, these procedures are subject to change and such
   change takes effect immediately upon its approval, regardless of



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 1]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   whether this document has yet been revised.

   The following two assumptions continue to be true of this
   specification.

   (1)  The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and Internet Research
        Steering Group (IRSG) are not a part of the process described
        here.

   (2)  The organization (and re-organization) of the IESG is not a part
        of the process described here.

   The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of
   reference.  The time frames assume that the IETF meets at least once
   per calendar year.  This document specifies time frames relative to
   the first IETF of the calendar year, or simply "First IETF".

   The remainder of this document is divided into four major topics as
   follows.

   General This a set of rules and constraints that apply to the
        selection and confirmation process as a whole.

   Nominating Committee Selection This is the process by which
        volunteers from the IETF community are recognized to serve on
        the committee that nominates candidates to serve on the IESG and
        IAB.

   Nominating Committee Operation This is the set of principles, rules,
        and constraints that guide the activities of the nominating
        committee, including the confirmation process.

   Member Recall This is the process by which the behavior of a sitting
        member of the IESG or IAB may be questioned, perhaps resulting
        in the removal of the sitting member.

   A final section describes how this document differs from its
   predecessor: RFC2282.

2.  General

   The following set of rules apply to the selection and confirmation
   process as a whole.  If necessary, a paragraph discussing the
   interpretation of each rule is included.

   (1)  The principal functions of the nominating committee are to
        review the open IESG and IAB positions and to either nominate
        its incumbent or recruit a superior candidate.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 2]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


      The nominating committee does not select the open positions to be
      reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review.

      At a minimum, the nominating committee will be given the title of
      the position to be reviewed.  The nominating committee may be
      given a desirable set of qualifications for the candidate
      nominated to fill each position.

      Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they do not
      wish to be nominated.

      The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it
      presents its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as
      indicated below.

   (2)  The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be
        completed within 3 months.

      The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be
      completed one month prior to the friday of the week before the
      First IETF.  It is expected to begin 4 months prior to the Friday
      of the week before the First IETF.

   (3)  One-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB positions is
        selected to be reviewed each year.

      The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately
      one-half of each of the sitting IESG and IAB members each year.
      It is recognized that circumstances may exist that will require
      the nominating committee to review more or less than one-half of
      the current positions, e.g., if the IESG or IAB have re-organized
      prior to this process and created new positions, or if there are
      an odd number of current positions.

   (4)  Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a 2 year
        term.

      The intent of this rule is to ensure that members of the IESG and
      IAB serve the number of years that best facilitates the review of
      one-half of the members each year.

      It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
      choose one or more of the currently open positions to which it may
      assign a term greater than 2 years in order to ensure the ideal
      application of this rule in the future.






Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 3]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


      It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to
      choose one or more of the currently open positions that share
      responsibilities with other positions (both those being reviewed
      and those sitting) to which it may assign a term greater than 2
      years to ensure that all such members will not be reviewed at the
      same time.

      All sitting member terms end during the First IETF meeting
      corresponding to the end of the term for which they were
      confirmed.  All confirmed candidate terms begin during the First
      IETF meeting corresponding to the beginning of the term for which
      they were confirmed.  Normally, the confirmed candidate's term
      begins when the currently sitting member's term ends on the last
      day of the meeting.  A term may begin or end no sooner than the
      first day of the meeting and no later than the last day of the
      meeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the currently
      sitting member and the confirmed candidate.  The confirmed
      candidate's term may overlap the sitting member's term during the
      meeting as determined by their mutual agreement.

   (5)  Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented
        here with four qualifications.  First, the most recently
        constituted nominating committee is reconvened to nominate a
        candidate to fill the vacancy.  Second, the selection and
        confirmation process is expected to be completed within 1 month,
        with all other time periods otherwise unspecified prorated
        accordingly.  Third, the confirming body has two weeks from the
        day it is notified of a candidate to reject the candidate,
        otherwise the candidate is assumed to have been confirmed.
        Fourth, the term of the confirmed candidate will be either:

   a. the remainder of the term of the open position if that remainder
      is not less than one year.

   b. the remainder of the term of the open position plus the next 2
      year term if that remainder is less than one year.

   (6)  All deliberations and supporting information that relates to
        specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are
        confidential.

      The nominating committee and confirming body members will be
      exposed to confidential information as a result of their
      deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and
      from those who provide requested supporting information.  All
      members and all other participants are expected to handle this
      information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 4]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


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

   (7)  Unless otherwise specified, the advise and consent model is used
        throughout the process.  This model is characterized as follows.

   a. The IETF Executive Director advises the nominating committee of
      the IESG and IAB positions to be reviewed.

   b. The nominating committee selects candidates and advises the
      confirming bodies of them.

   c. The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates, consenting to
      some, all, or none.

      If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the nominating
      committee with respect to reviewing the open IESG positions is
      considered complete.  If some or none of the candidates are
      confirmed, the nominating committee must reconvene to select
      alternate candidates for the rejected candidates.  Any additional
      time required by the nominating committee should not exceed its
      maximum time allotment.

   d. The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB candidates,
      consenting to some, all, or none.

      If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the nominating
      committee with respect to reviewing the open IAB positions is
      considered complete.  If some or none of the candidates are
      confirmed, the nominating committee must reconvene to select
      alternate candidates for the rejected candidates.  Any additional
      time required by the nominating committee should not exceed its
      maximum time allotment.

   e. The confirming bodies decide their consent according to a
      mechanism of their own choosing, which must ensure that at least
      one-half of the sitting members agree with the decision.

      At least one-half of the sitting members of the confirming bodies
      must agree to either confirm or reject each individual nominee.
      The agreement must be decided within a reasonable timeframe.  The
      agreement may be decided by conducting a formal vote, by asserting
      consensus based on informal exchanges (email), or by whatever
      mechanism is used to conduct the normal business of the confirming
      body.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 5]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


3.  Nominating Committee Selection

   The following set of rules apply to the creation of the nominating
   committee and the selection of its members.

   (1)  The committee comprises at least a non-voting Chair, 10 voting
        volunteers, and 3 non-voting liaisons.

      Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting
      advisor to participate in some or all of the deliberations of the
      committee.  The addition must be approved by both the voting and
      non-voting members of the committee according to its established
      voting mechanism.  Advisors participate as individuals.

      Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting
      liaison from other unrepresented organizations to participate in
      some or all of the deliberations of the committee.  The addition
      must be approved by both the voting and non-voting members of the
      committee according to its established voting mechanism.  Liaisons
      participate as representatives of their respective organizations.

      Advisors and liaisons must meet the usual requirements for
      membership in the nominating committee.  In the case of liaisons
      the requirements apply to the organization not to the individual.

   (2)  The Internet Society President appoints the non-voting Chair,
        who must meet the usual requirements for membership in the
        nominating committee.

      The nominating committee Chair must agree to invest the time
      necessary to ensure that the nominating committee completes its
      assigned duties and to perform in the best interests of the IETF
      community in that role.

   (3)  The Chair obtains the list of IESG and IAB positions to be
        reviewed and publishes it along with a solicitation for names of
        volunteers from the IETF community willing to serve on the
        nominating committee.

      The list of open positions is published with the solicitation to
      facilitate community members choosing between volunteering for an
      open position and volunteering for the nominating committee.

      The list and solicitation must be publicized using at least the
      same mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.

   (4)  Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of
        the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 6]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   (5)  Internet Society Board of Trustees, sitting members of the IAB,
        and sitting members of the IESG may not volunteer.

   (6)  The Chair announces the pool of volunteers from which the 10
        voting volunteers will be randomly selected.

      The announcement must be made using at least the same mechanism
      used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.

   (7)  The Chair randomly selects the 10 voting volunteers from the
        pool of names of volunteers using a method that can be
        independently verified to be unbiased and fair.

      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.

      The method must include an announcement of an enumerated list of
      the pool of names together with the specific algorithm for how
      names will be chosen from the list.  The output of the selection
      algorithm must depend on random data whose value is not known at
      the time the list and algorithm are announced.

      One possible method is described in [1].

      All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used
      by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.

   (8)  The sitting IAB and IESG members each appoint a non-voting
        liaison to the nominating committee from their current
        membership who are not sitting in an open position.

   (9)  The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as a
        non-voting liaison.

      The prior year's Chair may select a designee from a pool composed
      of the voting members of the prior year's committee and all prior
      Chairs if the Chair is unavailable.  If the prior year's Chair is
      unavailable and is unable or unwilling to make such a designation
      in a timely fashion, the Chair of the current committee may do so.

      Selecting a prior year's committee member as the designee permits
      the experience of the prior year's deliberations to be readily
      available to the current committee.  Selecting an earlier prior
      year Chair as the designee permits the experience of being a Chair
      as well as that Chair's committee deliberations to be readily
      available to the current committee.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 7]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


4.  Nominating Committee Operation

   The following rules apply to the operation of the nominating
   committee.  If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation
   of each rule is included.

   The rules are organized approximately in the order in which they
   would be invoked.

   The term nominee refers to an individual under consideration by the
   nominating committee.  The term candidate refers to a nominee that
   has been selected by the nominating committee to be considered for
   confirmation by a confirming body.  A confirmed candidate is a
   candidate that has been reviewed and approved by a confirming body.

   (1)  All rules and special circumstances not otherwise specified are
        at the discretion of the committee.

      Exceptional circumstances will occasionally arise during the
      normal operation of the nominating committee.  This rule is
      intended to foster the continued forward progress of the
      committee.

      Any member of the committee may propose a rule for adoption by the
      committee.  The rule must be approved by both the voting and non-
      voting members of the committee according to its established
      voting mechanism.

      All members of the committee should consider whether the exception
      is worthy of mention in the next revision of this document and
      followup accordingly.

   (2)  The Chair must establish and publicize milestones, which must
        include at least a call for nominations.

      There is a defined time period during which the selection and
      confirmation process must be completed.  The Chair must establish
      a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion, will result
      in the completion of the process on time.  The Chair should allow
      time for iterating the activities of the committee if one or more
      candidates is not confirmed.

      The milestones must be publicized using at least the same
      mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.







Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 8]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   (3)  The Chair must establish a voting mechanism.

      The committee must be able to objectively determine when a
      decision has been made during its deliberations.  The criteria for
      determining closure must be established and known to all members
      of the nominating committee.

   (4)  At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a
        vote.  A quorum comprises at least 7 voting members.

   (5)  The Chair may establish a process by which a member of the
        nominating committee may be recalled.

      The process, if established, must be agreed to by a 3/4 majority
      of the members of the nominating committee, including the non-
      voting members since they would be subject to the same process.

   (6)  All members of the nominating committee may participate in all
        deliberations.

      The emphasis of this rule is that no member, whether voting or
      non-voting, can be explicitly excluded from any deliberation.
      However, a member may individually choose not to participate in a
      deliberation.

   (7)  The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed and the
        call for nominees.

      The call for nominees must include a request for comments
      regarding the past performance of incumbents, which will be
      considered during the deliberations of the nominating committee.

      The announcements must be publicized using at least the same
      mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.

   (8)  Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of the
        IETF community for any open position.

      A self-nomination is permitted.

   (9)  Nominating committee members must not be nominees.

      To be a nominee is to enter the process of being selected as a
      candidate and confirmed.  Nominating committee members are not
      eligible to be considered for filling any open position.  They
      become ineligible as soon as their role is announced to the IETF
      community and they remain ineligible for the duration of this
      nominating committee's term.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 9]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   (10) Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG or
        IAB position during the previous two years must not be nominees.

   (11) The nominating committee selects candidates based on its
        understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the
        qualifications required to fill the open positions.

      The intent of this rule is to ensure that the nominating committee
      consults with a broad base of the IETF community for input to its
      deliberations.

      The consultations are permitted to include a slate of nominees, if
      all parties to the consultation agree to observe customary and
      reasonable rules of confidentiality.

      A broad base of the community should include the existing members
      of the IAB and IESG, especially sitting members who share
      responsibilities with open positions, e.g., co-Area Directors.

   (12) Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and
        must consent to their nomination prior to being confirmed.

      The nominating committee should help nominees provide
      justification to their employers.

      A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and
      include a commitment to provide the resources necessary to fill
      the open position and an assurance that the nominee will perform
      the duties of the position for which they are being considered in
      the best interests of the IETF community.

   (13) The nominating committee advises the confirming bodies of their
        candidates, specifying a single candidate for each open position
        and a testament as to how each candidate meets the
        qualifications of an open position.

      The testament may include a brief resume of the candidate and a
      summary of the deliberations of the nominating committee.

   (14) With respect to any action to be taken in the context of
        notifying and announcing confirmed candidates, and notifying
        rejected nominees and candidates, the action must be valid
        according to all of the rules specified below prior to its
        execution.







Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 10]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   a. Up until a candidate is confirmed, the identity of the candidate
      must be kept confidential.

   b. The identity of all nominees must be kept confidential (except
      that the nominee may publicize their intentions).

   c. Rejected nominees may be notified as soon as they are rejected.

   d. Rejected candidates may be notified as soon as they are rejected.

   e. Rejected nominees and candidates must be notified prior to
      announcing confirmed candidates.

   f. Confirmed candidates may be notified and announced as soon as they
      are confirmed.

      It is consistent with these rules for a nominee to never know if
      they were a candidate or not.

      It is consistent with these rules for some nominees to be rejected
      early in the process and for some nominees to be kept as
      alternates in case a candidate is rejected by a confirming body.
      In the matter of whether a confirmed candidate was a first choice
      or an alternate, that information need not ever be disclosed and,
      in fact, probably never should be.

      It is consistent with these rules for confirmed candidates to be
      notified and announced as quickly as possible instead of requiring
      all confirmed candidates to wait until all open positions have
      been reviewed.

      When consulting with individual members of the IETF community, if
      all parties to the consultation agree to observe customary and
      reasonable rules of confidentiality the consultations are
      permitted to include a slate of nominees.

      The announcements must be publicized using at least the same
      mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements.

5.  Member Recall

   The following rules apply to the recall process.  If necessary, a
   paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included.

   (1)  Anyone may request the recall of any sitting IAB or IESG member,
        at any time, upon written (email is acceptable) request with
        justification to the Internet Society President.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 11]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   (2)  Internet Society President shall appoint a Recall Committee
        Chair.

      The Internet Society President must not evaluate the recall
      request.  It is explicitly the responsibility of the IETF
      community to evaluate the behavior of its leaders.

   (3)  The recall committee is created according to the same rules as
        is the nominating committee with the qualifications that the
        person being investigated and the person requesting the recall
        must not be a member of the recall committee in any capacity.

   (4)  The recall committee operates according to the same rules as the
        nominating committee with the qualification that there is no
        confirmation process.

   (5)  The recall committee investigates the circumstances of the
        justification for the recall and votes on its findings.

      The investigation must include at least both an opportunity for
      the member being recalled to present a written statement and
      consultation with third parties.

   (6)  A 3/4 majority of the members who vote on the question is
        required for a recall.

   (7)  If a sitting member is recalled the open position is to be
      filled according to the mid-term vacancy rules.

6.  Changes From RFC2282

   Editorial changes are not described here, only substantive changes.
   They are listed here in the order in which they appear in the
   document.

   (1)  The frame of reference for timeframes was changed from the
        seasonal "Spring IETF" reference to the less geographic and more
        temporal "First IETF" reference.

   (2)  The terms of the sitting members and their respective confirmed
        candidates is explicitly permitted to overlap during the First
        IETF as determined by their mutual agreement.

   (3)  Nominating committee members who have served on prior committees
        are explicitly permitted to advise the current committee on the
        deliberations and results of the prior committee.





Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 12]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


   (4)  The role and opportunity for additional advisors and liaisons to
        the nominating committee was clarified.

   (5)  A reference to a documented and accepted fair and unbiased
        mechanism for randomly selecting nominating committee members
        from the pool of volunteers was added.

   (6)  The option for the prior year's Chair to select a designee to
        serve as liaison to the current year's committee was clarified
        to ensure the Chair selected a non-voting liaison from a pool
        composed of the prior year's voting members and all prior
        committee Chairs.

   (7)  The responsibility and authority for the activities of the
        nominating committee rests with the committee as a whole, not
        with the Chair.  The operation of the committee was clarified to
        require changes in process and the handling of exceptions to be
        approved by the committee as a whole as opposed to being at the
        discretion of the Chair.

   (8)  The rule that prevented nominating committee members from being
        eligible to be considered for any open position was clarified to
        explicitly state that the rule applies from the point in time
        that the committee membership is announced through the entire
        term of the current committee.

7.  Acknowledgements

   There have been a number of people involved with the development of
   this document over the years.  A great deal of credit goes to the
   first three Nominating Committee Chairs:

        1993 - Jeff Case

        1994 - Fred Baker

        1995 - John Curran

   who had the pleasure of operating without the benefit of a documented
   process.  It was their fine work and oral tradition that became the
   first version of this document.  Of course we can not overlook the
   bug discovery burden that each of the Chairs since the first
   publication have had to endure:








Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 13]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


        1996 - Guy Almes

        1997 - Geoff Houston

        1998 - Mike St. Johns

        1999 - Donald Eastlake

   Of course the bulk of the credit goes to the members of the POISSON
   Working Group, previously the POISED Working Group.  The prose here
   would not be what it is were it not for the attentive and insightful
   review of its members.  Specific acknowledgement must be extended to
   Scott Bradner and John Klensin, who have consistently contributed to
   the improvement of this document throughout its evolution.

8.  Security Considerations

   Any selection, confirmation, or recall process necessarily involves
   investigation into the qualifications and activities of prospective
   candidates.  The investigation may reveal confidential or otherwise
   private information about candidates to those participating in the
   process.  Each person who participates in any aspect of the process
   has a responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of any and all
   information not explicitly identified as suitable for public
   dissemination.

9.  References

   [1]  Eastlake, D., "Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection", RFC
        2777, February 2000.

10.  Editor's Address

   James M. Galvin
   eList eXpress LLC
   607 Trixsam Road
   Sykesville, MD 21784

   EMail: galvin@elistx.com












Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 14]

RFC 2727                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 2000


11.  Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 15]

