< draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-01.txt   draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-02.txt >
Network Working Group S. Moonesamy Network Working Group S. Moonesamy
Internet-Draft Internet-Draft
Updates: 7437 (if approved) J. Klensin Updates: 7437 (if approved) J. Klensin
Intended status: Best Current Practice March 31, 2019 Intended status: Best Current Practice May 15, 2019
Expires: October 2, 2019 Expires: November 16, 2019
Revision of the Recall Initiation Model Revision of the Recall Initiation Model
draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-01 draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-02
Abstract Abstract
The procedures for initiating a recall specified in RFC 7437 restrict The procedures for initiating a recall specified in RFC 7437 restrict
signatories of a recall petition to those who are "nomcom qualified". signatories of a recall petition to those who are "nomcom qualified".
This document suggests those limitations had unanticipated and This document suggests those limitations had unanticipated and
undesirable side-effects and proposes to remove them. It also undesirable side-effects and proposes to remove them. It also
specifies that remote participants should be allowed to seek redress specifies that remote participants should be allowed to seek redress
through the procedures and decreases the number of signatories through the procedures and decreases the number of signatories
required for a recall petition. required for a recall petition.
skipping to change at page 1, line 39 skipping to change at page 1, line 39
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 2, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 16, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Eligibility of IAB and IESG Members and other Nomcom 2.1. Eligibility of IAB and IESG Members and other Nomcom
Appointees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Appointees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Eligibility of Remote Participants . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. Eligibility of Remote Participants . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Number of Signatures Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3. Number of Signatures Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Recall Petition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Recall Petition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Recall Petition Initiated by the Community . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Recall Petition Initiated by the Community . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Recall Petition Initiated by the Ombudsteam . . . . . . . 4 3.2. Recall Petition Initiated by the Ombudsteam . . . . . . . 4
4. Tradeoffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Tradeoffs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix A. Historical Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Appendix A. Historical Note . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.1. Changes from draft-klensin-recall-rev-00 (2005-11-11) to B.1. Changes from draft-klensin-recall-rev-00 (2005-11-11) to
draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 draft-moonesamy-recall-rev-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B.2. Changes from version -00 (2019-03-23) to -01 . . . . . . 6 B.2. Changes from version -00 (2019-03-23) to -01 . . . . . . 7
B.3. Changes from version -01 (2019-03-31) to -02 . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC7437] defines the procedures for a Member Recall. The first step [RFC7437] defines the procedures for a Member Recall. The first step
of those procedures is to request a Member Recall by signed petition. of those procedures is to request a Member Recall by signed petition.
This document suggests that making IAB and IESG members ineligible to This document suggests that making IAB and IESG members ineligible to
initiate recalls was an undesirable side-effect and proposes to initiate recalls was an undesirable side-effect and proposes to
remove it. It also proposes to address the unfairness to which remove it. It also proposes to allow remote participants to be
remote participants are subject by allowing them to be signatories of signatories of a recall petition under some circumstances thus
a recall petition. Section 2 discusses some of the issues affecting addressing a possible perception of unfairness towards those who
that step and provides the rationale. The updated text is in cannot or do not travel to attend physical meetings. Section 2
Section 3.1. discusses some of the issues affecting that step and provides the
rationale. The updated text is in Section 3.1.
2. Rationale 2. Rationale
2.1. Eligibility of IAB and IESG Members and other Nomcom Appointees 2.1. Eligibility of IAB and IESG Members and other Nomcom Appointees
The procedures for initiating a recall specified in [RFC7437] The procedures for initiating a recall specified in [RFC7437]
restrict signatories to those who are "nomcom qualified". Perhaps restrict signatories to those who are "nomcom qualified". Perhaps
inadvertently, this prohibits members of the IESG and IAB from inadvertently, this prohibits members of the IESG and IAB from
initiating these procedures. This is probably not in the best initiating these procedures. This is probably not in the best
interests of the community: if there is a problem within the IESG or interests of the community: if there is a problem within the IESG or
IAB, other members of those bodies are likely to be aware of it IAB, other members of those bodies are likely to be aware of it
before the IETF community. before the IETF community.
skipping to change at page 3, line 49 skipping to change at page 3, line 52
participants at IETF meetings. However, the procedures exclude those participants at IETF meetings. However, the procedures exclude those
IETF participants from making a request for a Member Recall by signed IETF participants from making a request for a Member Recall by signed
petition. petition.
According to [RFC3777], "Volunteers are expected to be familiar with According to [RFC3777], "Volunteers are expected to be familiar with
the IETF processes and procedures, which are readily learned by the IETF processes and procedures, which are readily learned by
active participation in a working group and especially by serving as active participation in a working group and especially by serving as
a document editor or working group chair." There is also a "no more a document editor or working group chair." There is also a "no more
than two signatories may have the same primary affiliation" than two signatories may have the same primary affiliation"
restriction. Restricting signatories to those who are "nomcom restriction. Restricting signatories to those who are "nomcom
qualified" disenfranchises active remote participants who reside in qualified" may appear to disenfranchise active remote participants
emerging countries as they lack the extensive travel resources who lack the travel resources to attend physical meetings (such as
required to seek redress. those who reside in emerging countries) because they are unable to
use a recall petition to seek redress.
The "nomcom qualified" requirement for a recall petition is contrary The "nomcom qualified" requirement for a recall petition is contrary
to the spirit and one of the goals of the Internet Standards Process to the spirit and one of the goals of the Internet Standards Process
[RFC2026] about procedures which are intended to be fair. [RFC2026] about procedures which are intended to be fair.
2.3. Number of Signatures Required 2.3. Number of Signatures Required
[RFC7437] requires at least 20 signatories for a recall petition with [RFC7437] requires at least 20 signatories for a recall petition with
no more than two of the signatories having the same primary no more than two of the signatories having the same primary
affiliation. That sets a very high barrier for a recall petition affiliation. That sets a very high barrier for a recall petition
skipping to change at page 5, line 28 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
ineligible to be members of the recall committee itself and the ineligible to be members of the recall committee itself and the
community would presumably swiftly oppose such abuse. community would presumably swiftly oppose such abuse.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any IANA actions, This document does not require any IANA actions,
7. Acknowledgements 7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel for some of the text in The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel for some of the text in
Section 3.1 and Section 3.2, and Brian Carpenter and Spencer Dawkins Section 2.2, Section 3.1, and Section 3.2, and Brian Carpenter and
for several discussions and comments that helped stimulate this Spencer Dawkins for several discussions and comments that helped
draft. stimulate this draft.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC7437] Kucherawy, M., Ed., "IAB, IESG, and IAOC Selection, [RFC7437] Kucherawy, M., Ed., "IAB, IESG, and IAOC Selection,
Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the
Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 7437, Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 7437,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7437, January 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7437, January 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7437>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7437>.
skipping to change at page 7, line 8 skipping to change at page 7, line 17
o Added a new Tradeoffs Section with text about the risk of o Added a new Tradeoffs Section with text about the risk of
frivolous recall petitions frivolous recall petitions
o Added text in Section 3.2 to clarify that this document does not o Added text in Section 3.2 to clarify that this document does not
change the procedures in RFC 7776 for any petition originating change the procedures in RFC 7776 for any petition originating
from the Ombudsteam from the Ombudsteam
o Added more text in Section 3.1 to replace the "qualified to be o Added more text in Section 3.1 to replace the "qualified to be
voting members of a nominating committee" requirement in RFC 3777 voting members of a nominating committee" requirement in RFC 3777
B.3. Changes from version -01 (2019-03-31) to -02
o Editorial change to Section 2.2
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Subramanian Moonesamy Subramanian Moonesamy
76, Ylang Ylang Avenue 76, Ylang Ylang Avenue
Quatre Bornes Quatre Bornes
Mauritius Mauritius
Email: sm+ietf@elandsys.com Email: sm+ietf@elandsys.com
John C. Klensin John C. Klensin
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
18 lines changed or deleted 26 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/