[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-ietf-nomcom...] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Errata]

Updated by: 5078, 5633, 5680, 6859 BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
Errata Exist
Network Working Group                                     J. Galvin, Ed.
Request for Comments: 3777                             eList eXpress LLC
Obsoletes: 2727                                                June 2004
BCP: 10
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 (2004).

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 . .  .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  General  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   4.  Nominating Committee Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   5.  Nominating Committee Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   6.  Dispute Resolution Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   7.  Member Recall  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
   8.  Changes From RFC 2727. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
   9.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
   10. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
   11. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
   A.  Oral Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
   B.  Nominating Committee Timeline  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
       Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34







Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 1]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


1.  Introduction

   This document is a revision of and supercedes RFC 2727 [2].  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.

   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 three times
   per calendar year with approximately equal amounts of time between
   them.  The meetings are referred to as the First IETF, Second IETF,
   or Third IETF as needed.

   The next section lists the words and phrases commonly used throughout
   this document with their intended meaning.

   The majority 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 the
      volunteers who will serve on the committee are recognized.

   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: RFC 2727 [2].

   An appendix of useful facts and practices collected from previous
   nominating committees is also included.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 2]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


2.  Definitions

   The following words and phrases are commonly used throughout this
   document.  They are listed here with their intended meaning for the
   convenience of the reader.

   candidate: A nominee who has been selected to be considered for
      confirmation by a confirming body.

   confirmed candidate: A candidate that has been reviewed and approved
      by a confirming body.

   nominating committee term: The term begins when its members are
      officially announced, which is expected to be prior to the Third
      IETF to ensure it is fully operational at the Third IETF.  The
      term ends at the Third IETF (not three meetings) after the next
      nominating committee's term begins.

   nominee: A person who is being or has been considered for one or more
      open positions of the IESG or IAB.

   sitting member: A person who is currently serving a term of
      membership in the IESG, IAB or ISOC Board of Trustees.

3.  General

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

   1. The completion of the annual process is due within 7 months.

      The completion of the annual process is due one month prior to the
      Friday of the week before the First IETF.  It is expected to begin
      at least 8 months prior to the Friday of the week before the First
      IETF.

      The process officially begins with the announcement of the Chair
      of the committee.  The process officially ends when all confirmed
      candidates have been announced.

      The annual process is comprised of three major components as
      follows.

      1. The selection and organization of the nominating committee
         members.

      2. The selection of candidates by the nominating committee.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 3]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


      3. The confirmation of the candidates.

      There is an additional month set aside between when the annual
      process is expected to end and the term of the new candidates is
      to begin.  This time may be used during unusual circumstances to
      extend the time allocated for any of the components listed above.

   2. The principal functions of the nominating committee are to review
      each open IESG and IAB position and to either nominate its
      incumbent or a superior candidate.

      Although there is no term limit for serving in any IESG or IAB
      position, the nominating committee may use length of service as
      one of its criteria for evaluating an incumbent.

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

      The nominating committee will be given the title of the positions
      to be reviewed and a brief summary of the desired expertise of the
      candidate that is nominated to fill each position.

      Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they wish to be
      nominated.

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

      A superior candidate is one who the nominating committee believes
      would contribute in such a way as to improve or enhance the body
      to which he or she is nominated.

   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 IESG and IAB sitting 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, if there are an
      odd number of current positions, or if a member unexpectedly
      resigns.







Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 4]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   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.

      The term of a confirmed candidate selected according to the mid-
      term vacancy rules may be less than 2 years, as stated elsewhere
      in this document.

      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 of not more than 3 years in order to ensure the
      ideal application of this rule in the future.

      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 of not more than
      3 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.

      For confirmed candidates of the IESG the terms begin no later than
      when the currently sitting members' terms end 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.  A confirmed candidate's term may
      overlap the sitting member's term during the meeting as determined
      by their mutual agreement.

      For confirmed candidates of the IAB the terms overlap with the
      terms of the sitting members for the entire week of the meeting.

      For candidates confirmed under the mid-term vacancy rules, the
      term begins as soon as possible after the confirmation.









Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 5]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   5. Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented here
      with four qualifications.

      First, when there is only one official nominating committee, the
      body with the mid-term vacancy relegates the responsibility to
      fill the vacancy to it.  If the mid-term vacancy occurs during the
      period of time that the term of the prior year's nominating
      committee overlaps with the term of the current year's nominating
      committee, the body with the mid-term vacancy must relegate the
      responsibility to fill the vacancy to the prior year's nominating
      committee.

      Second, if it is the case that the nominating committee is
      reconvening to fill the mid-term vacancy, then the completion of
      the candidate selection and confirmation process is due within 6
      weeks, 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:

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

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

         In both cases a year is the period of time from a First IETF
         meeting to the next First IETF meeting.

   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.

      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.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 6]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


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

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

         The IESG and IAB are responsible for providing summary of the
         expertise desired of the candidates selected for their
         respective open positions to the Executive Director.  The
         summaries are provided to the nominating committee for its
         consideration.

      2. The nominating committee selects candidates based on its
         understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the
         qualifications required and advises each confirming body of its
         respective candidates.

      3. The confirming bodies review their respective candidates, they
         may at their discretion communicate with the nominating
         committee, and then consent to some, all, or none of the
         candidates.

         The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates.

         The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB
         candidates.

         The confirming bodies conduct their review using all
         information and any means acceptable to them, including but not
         limited to the supporting information provided by the
         nominating committee, information known personally to members
         of the confirming bodies and shared within the confirming body,
         the results of interactions within the confirming bodies, and
         the confirming bodies interpretation of what is in the best
         interests of the IETF community.

         If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the
         nominating committee with respect to those open positions is
         complete.

         If some or none of the candidates submitted to a confirming
         body are confirmed, the confirming body should communicate with
         the nominating committee both to explain the reason why all the
         candidates were not confirmed and to understand the nominating
         committee's rationale for its candidates.






Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 7]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


         The confirming body may reject individual candidates, in which
         case the nominating committee must select alternate candidates
         for the rejected candidates.

         Any additional time required by the nominating committee should
         not exceed its maximum time allotment.

      4. A confirming body decides whether it confirms each candidate
         using a confirmation decision rule chosen by the confirming
         body.

         If a confirming body has no specific confirmation decision
         rule, then confirming a given candidate should require at least
         one-half of the confirming body's sitting members to agree to
         that confirmation.

         The decision may be made by conducting a formal vote, by
         asserting consensus based on informal exchanges (e.g., email),
         or by any other mechanism that is used to conduct the normal
         business of the confirming body.

         Regardless of which decision rule the confirming body uses, any
         candidate that is not confirmed under that rule is considered
         to be rejected.

         The confirming body must make its decision within a reasonable
         time frame.  The results from the confirming body must be
         reported promptly to the nominating committee.

   8. The following rules apply to nominees candidates who are currently
      sitting members of the IESG or IAB, and who are not sitting in an
      open position being filled by the nominating committee.

      The confirmation of a candidate to an open position does not
      automatically create a vacancy in the IESG or IAB position
      currently occupied by the candidate.  The mid-term vacancy can not
      exist until, first, the candidate formally resigns from the
      current position and, second, the body with the vacancy formally
      decides for itself that it wants the nominating committee to fill
      the mid-term vacancy according to the rules for a mid-term vacancy
      documented elsewhere in this document.

      The resignation should be effective as of when the term of the new
      position begins.  The resignation may remain confidential to the
      IAB, IESG, and nominating committee until the confirmed candidate
      is announced for the new position.  The process, according to





Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 8]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


      rules set out elsewhere in this document, of filling the seat
      vacated by the confirmed candidate may begin as soon as the
      vacancy is publicly announced.

      Filling a mid-term vacancy is a separate and independent action
      from the customary action of filling open positions.  In
      particular, a nominating committee must complete its job with
      respect to filling the open positions and then separately proceed
      with the task of filling the mid-term vacancy according to the
      rules for a mid-term vacancy documented elsewhere in this
      document.

      However, the following exception is permitted in the case where
      the candidate for an open position is currently a sitting member
      of the IAB.  It is consistent with these rules for the
      announcements of a resignation of a sitting member of the IAB and
      of the confirmed candidate for the mid-term vacancy created by
      that sitting member on the IAB to all occur at the same time as
      long as the actual sequence of events that occurred did so in the
      following order.

      *  The nominating committee completes the advice and consent
         process for the open position being filled by the candidate
         currently sitting on the IAB.

      *  The newly confirmed candidate resigns from their current
         position on the IAB.

      *  The IAB with the new mid-term vacancy requests that the
         nominating committee fill the position.

      *  The Executive Director of the IETF informs the nominating
         committee of the mid-term vacancy.

      *  The nominating committee acts on the request to fill the mid-
         term vacancy.

   9. All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used
      by the IETF Secretariat for its announcements, including a notice
      on the IETF web site.

      As of the publication of this document, the current mechanism is
      an email message to both the "ietf" and the "ietf-announce"
      mailing lists.







Galvin                   Best Current Practice                  [Page 9]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


4.  Nominating Committee Selection

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

   1.  The completion of the process of selecting and organizing the
       members of the nominating committee is due within 3 months.

       The completion of the selection and organization process is due
       at least one month prior to the Third IETF.  This ensures the
       nominating committee is fully operational and available for
       interviews and consultation during the Third IETF.

   2.  The term of a nominating committee is expected to be 15 months.

       It is the intent of this rule that the end of a nominating
       committee's term overlap by approximately three months the
       beginning of the term of the next nominating committee.

       The term of a nominating committee begins when its members are
       officially announced.  The term ends at the Third IETF (not three
       meetings), i.e., the IETF meeting after the next nominating
       committee's term begins.

       A term is expected to begin at least two months prior to the
       Third IETF to ensure the nominating committee has at least one
       month to get organized before preparing for the Third IETF.

       A nominating committee is expected to complete any work-in-
       progress before it is dissolved at the end of its term.

       During the period of time that the terms of the nominating
       committees overlap, all mid-term vacancies are to be relegated to
       the prior year's nominating committee.  The prior year's
       nominating committee has no other responsibilities during the
       overlap period.  At all times other than the overlap period there
       is exactly one official nominating committee and it is
       responsible for all mid-term vacancies.

       When the prior year's nominating committee is filling a mid-term
       vacancy during the period of time that the terms overlap, the
       nominating committees operate independently.  However, some
       coordination is needed between them.  Since the prior year's
       Chair is a non-voting advisor to the current nominating committee
       the coordination is expected to be straightforward.

   3.  The nominating committee comprises at least a Chair, 10 voting
       volunteers, 3 liaisons, and an advisor.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 10]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


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

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

       The Chair is selected according to rules stated elsewhere in this
       document.

       The 10 voting volunteers are selected according to rules stated
       elsewhere in this document.

       The IESG and IAB liaisons are selected according to rules stated
       elsewhere in this document.

       The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a liaison to
       the nominating committee at its own discretion.

       The Chair of last year's nominating committee serves as an
       advisor according to rules stated elsewhere in this document.

       None of the Chair, liaisons, or advisors vote on the selection of
       candidates.  They do vote on all other issues before the
       committee unless otherwise specified in this document.

   4.  The Chair of the nominating committee is responsible for ensuring
       the nominating committee completes its assigned duties in a
       timely fashion and performs in the best interests of the IETF
       community.

       The Chair must be thoroughly familiar with the rules and guidance
       indicated throughout this document.  The Chair must ensure the
       nominating committee completes its assigned duties in a manner
       that is consistent with this document.

       The Chair must attest by proclamation at a plenary session of the
       First IETF that the results of the committee represent its best
       effort and the best interests of the IETF community.

       The Chair does not vote on the selection of candidates.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 11]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   5.  The Internet Society President appoints the Chair, who must meet
       the same requirements for membership in the nominating committee
       as a voting volunteer.

       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.

       The appointment is due no later than the Second IETF meeting to
       ensure it can be announced during a plenary session at that
       meeting.  The completion of the appointment is necessary to
       ensure the annual process can complete at the time specified
       elsewhere in this document.

   6.  A Chair, in consultation with the Internet Society President, may
       appoint a temporary substitute for the Chair position.

       There are a variety of ordinary circumstances that may arise from
       time to time that could result in a Chair being unavailable to
       oversee the activities of the committee.  The Chair, in
       consultation with the Internet Society President, may appoint a
       substitute from a pool comprised of the liaisons currently
       serving on the committee and the prior year's Chair or designee.

       Any such appointment must be temporary and does not absolve the
       Chair of any or all responsibility for ensuring the nominating
       committee completes its assigned duties in a timely fashion.

   7.  Liaisons are responsible for ensuring the nominating committee in
       general and the Chair in particular execute their assigned duties
       in the best interests of the IETF community.

       Liaisons are expected to represent the views of their respective
       organizations during the deliberations of the committee.  They
       should provide information as requested or when they believe it
       would be helpful to the committee.

       Liaisons from the IESG and IAB are expected to provide
       information to the nominating committee regarding the operation,
       responsibility, and composition of their respective bodies.

       Liaisons are expected to convey questions from the committee to
       their respective organizations and responses to those questions
       to the committee, as requested by the committee.

       Liaisons from the IESG, IAB, and Internet Society Board of
       Trustees (if one was appointed) are expected to review the



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 12]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       operation and executing process of the nominating committee and
       to report any concerns or issues to the Chair of the nominating
       committee immediately.  If they can not resolve the issue between
       themselves, liaisons must report it according to the dispute
       resolution process stated elsewhere in this document.

       Liaisons from confirming bodies are expected to assist the
       committee in preparing the testimony it is required to provide
       with its candidates.

       Liaisons may have other nominating committee responsibilities as
       required by their respective organizations or requested by the
       nominating committee, except that such responsibilities may not
       conflict with any other provisions of this document.

       Liaisons do not vote on the selection of candidates.

   8.  The sitting IAB and IESG members each appoint a liaison from
       their current membership, someone who is not sitting in an open
       position, to serve on the nominating committee.

   9.  An advisor is responsible for such duties as specified by the
       invitation that resulted in the appointment.

       Advisors do not vote on the selection of candidates.

   10. The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as an
       advisor to the current committee.

       The prior year's Chair is expected to review the actions and
       activities of the current Chair and to report any concerns or
       issues to the nominating committee Chair immediately.  If they
       can not resolve the issue between themselves, the prior year's
       Chair must report it according to the dispute resolution process
       stated elsewhere in this document.

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

       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



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 13]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       Chair as well as that Chair's committee deliberations to be
       readily available to the current committee.

       All references to "prior year's Chair" in this document refer to
       the person serving in that role, whether it is the actual prior
       year's Chair or a designee.

   11. Voting volunteers are responsible for completing the tasks of the
       nominating committee in a timely fashion.

       Each voting volunteer is expected to participate in all
       activities of the nominating committee with a level of effort
       approximately equal to all other voting volunteers.  Specific
       tasks to be completed are established and managed by the Chair
       according to rules stated elsewhere in this document.

   12. The Chair must establish and announce milestones for the
       selection of the nominating committee members.

       There is a defined time period during which the selection process
       is due to 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.

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

       The solicitation must permit the community at least 30 days
       during which they may choose to volunteer to be selected for 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.

   14. Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 3 of
       the last 5 IETF meetings in order to volunteer.

       The 5 meetings are the five most recent meetings that ended prior
       to the date on which the solicitation for nominating committee
       volunteers was submitted for distribution to the IETF community.

       The IETF Secretariat is responsible for confirming that
       volunteers have met the attendance requirement.





Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 14]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       Volunteers must provide their full name, email address, and
       primary company or organization affiliation (if any) when
       volunteering.

       Volunteers are expected to be familiar with the IETF processes
       and procedures, which are readily learned by active participation
       in a working group and especially by serving as a document editor
       or working group chair.

   15. Members of the Internet Society Board of Trustees, sitting
       members of the IAB, and sitting members of the IESG may not
       volunteer to serve on the nominating committee.

   16. The Chair announces both the list of the pool of volunteers from
       which the 10 voting volunteers will be randomly selected and the
       method with which the selection will be completed.

       The announcement should be made at least 1 week prior to the date
       on which the random selection will occur.

       The pool of volunteers must be enumerated or otherwise indicated
       according to the needs of the selection method to be used.

       The announcement must specify the data that will be used as input
       to the selection method.  The method must depend on random data
       whose value is not known or available until the date on which the
       random selection will occur.

       It must be possible to independently verify that the selection
       method used is both fair and unbiased.  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.

       It must be possible to repeat the selection method, either
       through iteration or by restarting in such a way as to remain
       fair and unbiased.  This is necessary to replace selected
       volunteers should they become unavailable after selection.

       The selection method must produce an ordered list of volunteers.

       One possible selection method is described in RFC 2777 [1].

   17. The Chair randomly selects the 10 voting volunteers from the pool
       of names of volunteers and announces the members of the
       nominating committee.





Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 15]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       No more than two volunteers with the same primary affiliation may
       be selected for the nominating committee.  The Chair reviews the
       primary affiliation of each volunteer selected by the method in
       turn.  If the primary affiliation for a volunteer is the same as
       two previously selected volunteers, that volunteer is removed
       from consideration and the method is repeated to identify the
       next eligible volunteer.

       There must be at least two announcements of all members of the
       nominating committee.

       The first announcement should occur as soon after the random
       selection as is reasonable for the Chair.  The community must
       have at least 1 week during which any member may challenge the
       results of the random selection.

       The challenge must be made in writing (email is acceptable) to
       the Chair.  The Chair has 48 hours to review the challenge and
       offer a resolution to the member.  If the resolution is not
       accepted by the member, that member may report the challenge
       according to the dispute resolution process stated elsewhere in
       this document.

       If a selected volunteer, upon reading the announcement with the
       list of selected volunteers, finds that two or more other
       volunteers have the same affiliation, then the volunteer should
       notify the Chair who will determine the appropriate action.

       During at least the 1 week challenge period the Chair must
       contact each of the members and confirm their willingness and
       availability to serve.  The Chair should make every reasonable
       effort to contact each member.

       *  If the Chair is unable to contact a liaison the problem is
          referred to the respective organization to resolve.  The Chair
          should allow a reasonable amount of time for the organization
          to resolve the problem and then may proceed without the
          liaison.

       *  If the Chair is unable to contact an advisor the Chair may
          elect to proceed without the advisor, except for the prior
          year's Chair for whom the Chair must consult with the Internet
          Society President as stated elsewhere in this document.








Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 16]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       *  If the Chair is unable to contact a voting volunteer the Chair
          must repeat the random selection process in order to replace
          the unavailable volunteer.  There should be at least 1 day
          between the announcement of the iteration and the selection
          process.

       After at least 1 week and confirming that 10 voting volunteers
       are ready to serve, the Chair makes the second announcement of
       the members of the nominating committee, which officially begins
       the term of the nominating committee.

   18. The Chair works with the members of the committee to organize
       itself in preparation for completing its assigned duties.

       The committee has approximately one month during which it can
       self-organize.  Its responsibilities during this time include but
       are not limited to the following.

       *  Setting up a regular teleconference schedule.

       *  Setting up an internal web site.

       *  Setting up a mailing list for internal discussions.

       *  Setting up an email address for receiving community input.

       *  Establishing operational procedures.

       *  Establishing milestones in order to monitor the progress of
          the selection process.

5.  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.

   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.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 17]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       Any member of the committee may propose a rule for adoption by
       the committee.  The rule must be approved by 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 follow-up accordingly.

   2.  The completion of the process of selecting candidates to be
       confirmed by their respective confirming body is due within 3
       months.

       The completion of the selection process is due at least two
       month's prior to the First IETF.  This ensures the nominating
       committee has sufficient time to complete the confirmation
       process.

   3.  The completion of the process of confirming the candidates is due
       within 1 month.

       The completion of the confirmation process is due at least one
       month prior to the First IETF.

   4.  The Chair must establish for the nominating committee a set of
       milestones for the candidate selection and confirmation process.

       There is a defined time period during which the candidate
       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 Chair should ensure that all committee members are aware of
       the milestones.

   5.  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.

   6.  At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a
       vote.






Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 18]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       Only voting volunteers vote on a candidate selection.  For a
       candidate selection vote a quorum is comprised of at least 7 of
       the voting volunteers.

       At all other times a quorum is present if at least 75% of the
       nominating committee members are participating.

   7.  Any member of the nominating committee may propose to the
       committee that any other member except the Chair be recalled.
       The process for recalling the Chair is defined elsewhere in this
       document.

       There are a variety of ordinary circumstances that may arise that
       could result in one or more members of the committee being
       unavailable to complete their assigned duties, for example health
       concerns, family issues, or a change of priorities at work.  A
       committee member may choose to resign for unspecified personal
       reasons.  In addition, the committee may not function well as a
       group because a member may be disruptive or otherwise
       uncooperative.

       Regardless of the circumstances, if individual committee members
       can not work out their differences between themselves, the entire
       committee may be called upon to discuss and review the
       circumstances.  If a resolution is not forthcoming a vote may be
       conducted.  A member may be recalled if at least a quorum of all
       committee members agree, including the vote of the member being
       recalled.

       If a liaison member is recalled the committee must notify the
       affected organization and must allow a reasonable amount of time
       for a replacement to be identified by the organization before
       proceeding.

       If an advisor member other than the prior year's Chair is
       recalled, the committee may choose to proceed without the
       advisor.  In the case of the prior year's Chair, the Internet
       Society President must be notified and the current Chair must be
       allowed a reasonable amount of time to consult with the Internet
       Society President to identify a replacement before proceeding.

       If a single voting volunteer position on the nominating committee
       is vacated, regardless of the circumstances, the committee may
       choose to proceed with only 9 voting volunteers at its own
       discretion.  In all other cases a new voting member must be
       selected, and the Chair must repeat the random selection process
       including an announcement of the iteration prior to the actual
       selection as stated elsewhere in this document.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 19]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       A change in the primary affiliation of a voting volunteer during
       the term of the nominating committee is not a cause to request
       the recall of that volunteer, even if the change would result in
       more than two voting volunteers with the same affiliation.

   8.  Only the prior year's Chair may request the recall of the current
       Chair.

       It is the responsibility of the prior year's Chair to ensure the
       current Chair completes the assigned tasks in a manner consistent
       with this document and in the best interests of the IETF
       community.

       Any member of the committee who has an issue or concern regarding
       the Chair should report it to the prior year's Chair immediately.
       The prior year's Chair is expected to report it to the Chair
       immediately.  If they can not resolve the issue between
       themselves, the prior year's Chair must report it according to
       the dispute resolution process stated elsewhere in this document.

   9.  All members of the nominating committee may participate in all
       deliberations.

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

   10. The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed, the
       desired expertise provided by the IETF Executive Director, 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 call must request that a nomination include a valid, working
       email address, a telephone number, or both for the nominee.  The
       nomination must include the set of skills or expertise the
       nominator believes the nominee has that would be desirable.

   11. Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of the
       IETF community for any open position, whose eligibility to serve
       will be confirmed by the nominating committee.

       A self-nomination is permitted.

       Nominating committee members are not eligible to be considered
       for filling any open position by the nominating committee on



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 20]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       which they serve.  They become ineligible as soon as the term of
       the nominating committee on which they serve officially begins.
       They remain ineligible for the duration of that nominating
       committee's term.

       Although each nominating committee's term overlaps with the
       following nominating committee's term, nominating committee
       members are eligible for nomination by the following committee if
       not otherwise disqualified.

       Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG or
       IAB position during the previous two years are not eligible to be
       considered for filling any open position.

   12. 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.  In particular, the nominating
       committee must determine if the desired expertise for the open
       positions matches its understanding of the qualifications desired
       by the IETF community.

       The consultations are permitted to include names of nominees, if
       all parties to the consultation agree to observe the same
       confidentiality rules as the nominating committee itself.

       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,
       and working group chairs, especially those in the areas with open
       positions.

       Only voting volunteer members vote to select candidates.

   13. Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and
       must consent to their nomination prior to being chosen as
       candidates.

       Although the nominating committee will make every reasonable
       effort to contact and to remain in contact with nominees, any
       nominee whose contact information changes during the process and
       who wishes to still be considered should inform the nominating
       committee of the changes.





Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 21]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and
       must 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.

       Consenting to a nomination must occur prior to a nominee being a
       candidate and may occur as soon after the nomination as needed by
       the nominating committee.

       Consenting to a nomination must not imply the nominee will be a
       candidate.

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

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

       For each candidate, the testimony must include a brief statement
       of the qualifications for the position that is being filled,
       which may be exactly the expertise that was requested.  If the
       qualifications differ from the expertise originally requested a
       brief statement explaining the difference must be included.

       The testimony may include either or both of a brief resume of the
       candidate and a brief summary of the deliberations of the
       nominating committee.

   15. Confirmed candidates must consent to their confirmation and
       rejected candidates and nominees must be notified before
       confirmed candidates are announced.

       It is not necessary to notify and get consent from all confirmed
       candidates together.

       A nominee may not know they were a candidate.  This permits a
       candidate to be rejected by a confirming body without the nominee
       knowing about the rejection.

       Rejected nominees, who consented to their nomination, and
       rejected candidates must be notified prior to announcing the
       confirmed candidates.

       It is not necessary to announce all confirmed candidates
       together.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 22]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       The nominating committee must ensure that all confirmed
       candidates are prepared to serve prior to announcing their
       confirmation.

   16. The nominating committee should archive the information it has
       collected or produced for a period of time not to exceed its
       term.

       The purpose of the archive is to assist the nominating committee
       should it be necessary for it to fill a mid-term vacancy.

       The existence of an archive, how it is implemented, and what
       information to archive is at the discretion of the committee.
       The decision must be approved by a quorum of the voting volunteer
       members.

       The implementation of the archive should make every reasonable
       effort to ensure that the confidentiality of the information it
       contains is maintained.

6.  Dispute Resolution Process

   The dispute resolution process described here is to be used as
   indicated elsewhere in this document.  Its applicability in other
   circumstances is beyond the scope of this document.

   The nominating committee operates under a strict rule of
   confidentiality.  For this reason when process issues arise it is
   best to make every reasonable effort to resolve them within the
   committee.  However, when circumstances do not permit this or no
   resolution is forthcoming, the process described here is to be used.

   The following rules apply to the process.

   1.  The results of this process are final and binding.  There is no
       appeal.

   2.  The process begins with the submission of a request as described
       below to the Internet Society President.

   3.  As soon as the process begins, the nominating committee may
       continue those activities that are unrelated to the issue to be
       resolved except that it must not submit any candidates to a
       confirming body until the issue is resolved.

   4.  All parties to the process are subject to the same
       confidentiality rules as each member of the nominating committee.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 23]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   5.  The process should be completed within two weeks.

   The process is as follows:

   1.  The party seeking resolution submits a written request (email is
       acceptable) to the Internet Society President detailing the issue
       to be resolved.

   2.  The Internet Society President appoints an arbiter to investigate
       and resolve the issue.  A self-appointment is permitted.

   3.  The arbiter investigates the issue making every reasonable effort
       to understand both sides of the issue.  Since the arbiter is
       subject to the same confidentiality obligations as all nominating
       committee members, all members are expected to cooperate fully
       with the arbiter and to provide all relevant information to the
       arbiter for review.

   4.  After consultation with the two principal parties to the issue,
       the arbiter decides on a resolution.  Whatever actions are
       necessary to execute the resolution are immediately begun and
       completed as quickly as possible.

   5.  The arbiter summarizes the issue, the resolution, and the
       rationale for the resolution for the Internet Society President.

   6.  In consultation with the Internet Society President, the arbiter
       prepares a report of the dispute and its resolution.  The report
       should include all information that in the judgment of the
       arbiter does not violate the confidentiality requirements of the
       nominating committee.

   7.  The Chair includes the dispute report when reporting on the
       activities of the nominating committee to the IETF community.

7.  Member Recall

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

   1.  At any time, at least 20 members of the IETF community, who are
       qualified to be voting members of a nominating committee, may
       request by signed petition (email is acceptable) to the Internet
       Society President the recall of any sitting IAB or IESG member.

       All individual and collective qualifications of nominating
       committee eligibility are applicable, including that no more than
       two signatories may have the same primary affiliation.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 24]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


       Each signature must include a full name, email address, and
       primary company or organization affiliation.

       The IETF Secretariat is responsible for confirming that each
       signatory is qualified to be a voting member of a nominating
       committee.  A valid petition must be signed by at least 20
       qualified signatories.

       The petition must include a statement of justification for the
       recall and all relevant and appropriate supporting documentation.

       The petition and its signatories must be announced to the IETF
       community.

   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 both the
       person being investigated and the parties 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.









Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 25]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


8.  Changes From RFC 2727

   This section describes the substantive changes from RFC 2727, listed
   approximately in the order in which they appear in the document.

   1.  A section with definitions for words and phrases used throughout
       the document was inserted.

   2.  The role of term limits as a selection criterion was clarified.

   3.  The nominating committee must now be provided with a brief
       description of the desirable expertise for each candidate to be
       nominated for each position.

   4.  Because of the overlapping terms of successive nominating
       committees, the specific committee responsible for a mid-term
       vacancy was specified.

   5.  The characterization of the advice and consent model was revised
       to permit the confirming body to communicate with the nominating
       committee during the approval process.

   6.  A general rule was added to define that all announcements are
       made with the usual IETF Secretariat mechanism.

   7.  Details regarding the expected timeline of the selection and
       operation of the committee were made even more explicit.  An
       Appendix was added that captures all the details for the
       convenience of the reader.

   8.  The term of the nominating committee was extended to
       approximately 15 months such that it explicitly overlaps by
       approximately 3 months the next year's nominating committee's
       term.

   9.  The terms voting member and non-voting member were replaced by
       voting volunteers, liaisons, and advisors.  All members vote at
       all times except that only voting volunteers vote on a candidate
       selection.

   10. The responsibilities of the Chair, liaisons, advisors, and voting
       volunteers is now explicitly stated.

   11. Processes for recalling members of the committee were added.

   12. Liaisons and advisors are no longer required to meet the usual
       requirements for nominating committee membership.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 26]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   13. The Internet Society Board of Trustees may appoint a non-voting
       liaison.

   14. The eligibility qualifications for the nominating committee were
       changed to require attendance at 3 out of 5 of the last five
       meetings, to require volunteers to submit identifying contact
       information, and to request that volunteers be familiar with IETF
       processes and procedures.

   15. Some additional clarification was added to the method used to
       select volunteers.

   16. The process for selecting the 10 voting volunteers had several
       clarifications and additional requirements added, including a
       challenge process and the requirement to disallow more than two
       volunteers with the same primary affiliation.

   17. Nominations for open positions should include both contact
       information and a description of the skills or expertise the
       nominator believes the nominee possesses.

   18. Nominees are requested to keep the nominating committee informed
       of changes in their contact information.  Editorially, the
       distinction between a nominee and candidate was emphasized.

   19. A description of a testimony to be provided with each candidate
       to a confirming body by the nominating committee is specified.

   20. The rules regarding the announcement of confirmed candidates were
       substantially rewritten to make it easier to understand.

   21. The nominating committee is permitted to keep an archive for the
       duration of its term of the information it collects and produces
       for its own internal use.

   22. A dispute resolution process for addressing process concerns was
       added.

   23. The process for recalling a sitting member of the IAB and IESG
       requires at least 20 eligible members of the IETF community to
       sign a petition requesting the recall.

   24. The section on Security Considerations was expanded.

   25. Appendix A, Oral Tradition, has been added.

   26. Appendix B, Nominating Committee Timeline, has been added as a
       convenience to the reader.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 27]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


9.  Acknowledgements

   There have been a number of people involved with the development of
   this document over the years as it has progressed from RFC 2027
   through RFC 2282 [3] and RFC 2727 [2] to its current version.

   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:

      1996 - Guy Almes

      1997 - Geoff Huston

      1998 - Mike St. Johns

      1999 - Donald Eastlake

      2000 - Avri Doria

      2001 - Bernard Adoba

      2002 - Ted T'so

      2003 - Phil Roberts

   The bulk of the early 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 consistently contributed to the
   improvement of the first three versions of this document.







Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 28]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   In January 2002, a new working group was formed, the Nominating
   Committee Working Group (nomcom), to revise the RFC 2727 version.
   This working group was guided by the efforts of a design team whose
   members were as follows:

      Bernard Adoba

      Harald Alvestrand - Chair of the IETF

      Leslie Daigle - Chair of the IAB

      Avri Doria - Chair of the Working Group

      James Galvin - Editor of the Document

      Joel Halpern

      Thomas Narten

10.  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
   must maintain the confidentiality of any and all information not
   explicitly identified as suitable for public dissemination.

   When the nominating committee decides it is necessary to share
   confidential or otherwise private information with others, the
   dissemination must be minimal and must include a prior commitment
   from all persons consulted to observe the same confidentiality rules
   as the nominating committee itself.


11.  Informative References

   [1] Eastlake, 3rd, D., "Publicly Verifiable Nominations Committee
       (Nomcom) Random Selection", RFC 3797, June 2004.

   [2] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall
       Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP
       10, RFC 2727, February 2000.

   [3] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall
       Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP
       10, RFC 2282, February 1998.



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 29]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


Appendix A.  Oral Tradition

   Over the years various nominating committees have learned through
   oral tradition passed on by liaisons that there are certain
   consistencies in the process and information considered during
   deliberations.  Some items from that oral tradition are collected
   here to facilitate its consideration by future nominating committees.

   1.  It has been found that experience as an IETF Working Group Chair
       or an IRTF Research Group Chair is helpful in giving a nominee
       experience of what the job of an Area Director involves.  It also
       helps a nominating committee judge the technical, people, and
       process management skills of the nominee.

   2.  No person should serve both on the IAB and as an Area Director,
       except the IETF Chair whose roles as an IAB member and Area
       Director of the General Area are set out elsewhere.

   3.  The strength of the IAB is found in part in the balance of the
       demographics of its members (e.g., national distribution, years
       of experience, gender, etc.), the combined skill set of its
       members, and the combined sectors (e.g., industry, academia,
       etc.) represented by its members.

   4.  There are no term limits explicitly because the issue of
       continuity versus turnover should be evaluated each year
       according to the expectations of the IETF community, as it is
       understood by each nominating committee.

   5.  The number of nominating committee members with the same primary
       affiliation is limited in order to avoid the appearance of
       improper bias in choosing the leadership of the IETF.  Rather
       than defining precise rules for how to define "affiliation", the
       IETF community depends on the honor and integrity of the
       participants to make the process work.
















Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 30]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


Appendix B.  Nominating Committee Timeline

   This appendix is included for the convenience of the reader and is
   not to be interpreted as the definitive timeline.  It is intended to
   capture the detail described elsewhere in this document in one place.
   Although every effort has been made to ensure the description here is
   consistent with the description elsewhere, if there are any conflicts
   the definitive rule is the one in the main body of this document.

   The only absolute in the timeline rules for the annual process is
   that its completion is due by the First IETF of the year after the
   nominating committee begins its term.  This is supported by the fact
   that the confirmed candidate terms begin during the week of the First
   IETF.

   The overall annual process is designed to be completed in 7 months.
   It is expected to start 8 months prior to the First IETF.  The 7
   months is split between three major components of the process as
   follows.

   1.  First is the selection and organization of the committee members.
       Three months are allotted for this process.

   2.  Second is the selection of the candidates by the nominating
       committee.  Three months are allotted for this process.

   3.  Third is the confirmation of the candidates by their respective
       confirming bodies.  One month is allotted for this process.

   The following figure captures the details of the milestones within
   each component.  For illustrative purposes the figure presumes the
   Friday before the First IETF is March 1.

   0.  BEGIN 8 Months Prior to First IETF (approx. July 1); Internet
       Society President appoints the Chair.  The appointment must be
       done no later than the Second IETF or 8 months prior to the First
       IETF, whichever comes first.  The Chair must be announced and
       recognized during a plenary session of the Second IETF.

   1.  The Chair establishes and announces milestones to ensure the
       timely selection of the nominating committee members.

   2.  The Chair contacts the IESG, IAB, and Internet Society Board of
       Trustees and requests a liaison.  The Chair contacts the prior
       year's Chair and requests an advisor.  The Chair obtains the list
       of IESG and IAB open positions and descriptions from the IETF
       Executive Director.




Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 31]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   3.  The Chair announces the solicitation for voting volunteer members
       that must remain open for at least 30 days.  The announcement
       must be done no later than 7 months and 2 weeks prior to the
       First IETF (approx. July 15).

   4.  After the solicitation closes the Chair announces the pool of
       volunteers and the date of the random selection, which must be at
       least 1 week in the future.  The announcement must be done no
       later than 6 months and 2 weeks prior to the First IETF (approx.
       August 15).

   5.  On the appointed day the random selection occurs and the Chair
       announces the members of the committee and the 1 week challenge
       period.  The announcement must be done no later than 6 months and
       1 week prior to the First IETF (approx. August 22).

   6.  During the challenge period the Chair contacts each of the
       committee members and confirms their availability to participate.

   7.  After the challenge period closes the Chair announces the members
       of the committee and its term begins.  The announcement must be
       done no later than 6 months prior to the First IETF (approx.
       September 1).

   8.  The committee has one month during which it is to self-organize
       in preparation for completing its assigned duties.  This must be
       done no later than 5 months prior to the First IETF (approx.
       October 1).

   9.  END the Committee Member Selection Process; BEGIN the Selection
       of Candidates; Time is at least 5 months prior to the First IETF
       (approx. October 1).

   10. The Chair establishes and announces the milestones to ensure the
       timely selection of the candidates, including a call for
       nominations for the open positions.  The announcement must be
       done no later than 5 months prior to the First IETF (approx.
       October 1).

   11. Over the next 3 months the nominating committee collects input
       and deliberates.  It should plan to conduct interviews and other
       consultations during the Third IETF.  The committee is due to
       complete its candidate selection no later than 2 months prior to
       the First IETF (approx. January 1).

   12. END the Selection of Candidates; BEGIN the Confirmation of
       Candidates; Time is at least 2 months prior to the First IETF
       (approx. January 1);



Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 32]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


   13. The committee presents its candidates to their respective
       confirming bodies.  The presentation must be done no later than 2
       months prior to the First IETF (approx. January 1).

   14. The confirming bodies have 1 month to deliberate and, in
       communication with the nominating committee, accept or reject
       candidates.

   15. The Chair announces the confirmed candidates.  The announcement
       must be done no later than 1 month prior to the First IETF
       (approx. February 1).

Author's Address

   James M. Galvin (editor)
   eList eXpress LLC
   607 Trixsam Road
   Sykesville, MD  21784
   US

   Phone: +1 410-549-4619
   Fax:   +1 410-795-7978
   EMail: galvin+ietf@elistx.com
   URI:   http://www.elistx.com/



























Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 33]

RFC 3777                 IAB and IESG Selection                June 2004


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

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









Galvin                   Best Current Practice                 [Page 34]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/