This is a purely informative rendering of an RFC that includes verified errata. This rendering may not be used as a reference.

The following 'Verified' errata have been incorporated in this document: EID 2807
Network Working Group                                     L. Daigle, Ed.
Request for Comments: 3677                   Internet Architecture Board
BCP: 77                                                              IAB
Category: Best Current Practice                                  December 2003 
EID 2807 (Verified) is as follows:

Section: GLOBAL

Original Text:

Category: Standards Track

Corrected Text:

Category: Best Current Practice
IETF ISOC Board of Trustee Appointment Procedures 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 (2003). All Rights Reserved. Abstract This memo outlines the process by which the IETF makes a selection of an Internet Society (ISOC) Board of Trustees appointment. 1. Introduction The Internet Society (ISOC) provides organizational and financial support for the IETF. As stipulated in ISOC's by-laws the IETF is called upon to name 3 Trustees to its Board (BoT), with staggered 3 year terms. This requires that the IETF name one Trustee each year. This memo outlines the process by which the IETF makes that selection. This process will also be used in the event of mid-term vacancies that may arise with IETF nominated Board positions. 1.1. Overview of Selection Process In brief, this document describes the timeframe and procedures for the IAB to solicit public input and make a selection for the open position each year. 1.2. Rationale An alternative approach to making a selection for these positions would be to use the IETF's NomCom (RFC 2727 [1] and its revisions). However, that NomCom is chartered and defined specifically to the task of making selections for IETF organization tasks, and the ISOC BoT appointment process does not fit that in 2 ways: 1. the timeframe of the appointment does not mesh with the IETF appointment cycle 2. the nature of the deliberations and the type of information solicited would be significantly different for an external appointment, such as this appointment to the ISOC BoT The first issue (timing) could be resolved fairly easily for this specific appointment. The second issue is more general, and not reasonably reconciled with the IETF NomCom task as currently specified. The process described in RFC 2727 is oriented toward soliciting feedback from the IETF community with respect to individuals and technical positions with which they have personal experience. To make a good decision on external appointments, in general, the NomCom would have to understand the requirements for those positions, and attempt to evaluate candidates for a very different set of skills than is required of IAB/IESG members. It might also require soliciting feedback from outside the IETF community. There is no question that the individuals that constitute the IETF NomCom each year have the competence to carry out such a search; the issue is that it is a very different task, would require additional time and resources, and therefore is a side effort that could very well undermine the effectiveness of the NomCom in carrying out its primary task for the IETF. By contrast, the IAB is chartered to be responsible for IETF external liaisons, is a standing body that works with ISOC (and the ISOC Board), and therefore has a working knowledge of the requirements of the specific position discussed here. At some future point, if there is a more general need to make external appointments, the IETF may consider broadening the scope of the IETF NomCom role, or create a separate nominating committee for such external non-liaison appointments. This document proposes that is not necessary or desirable for the purposes of this one annual appointment. 2. Desirable Qualifications and Selection Criteria for an IETF-Nominated ISOC Trustee Candidates for an ISOC Trustee should have a demonstrable involvement in the IETF with a particular focus on active participation in IETF Working Groups. The candidate is expected to possess clearly demonstrated technical competence in Internet technology, and be able to articulate technology issues such that the ISOC Board can be provided with sound technical perspectives. The candidate is also expected to be able to understand the respective roles and responsibilities of the IETF and ISOC and be able to articulate these roles within both organizational communities. The candidate will also be expected to exercise all the duties of an ISOC Board member, including fiduciary responsibility, setting of policies, oversight of the operation of the Society, representing the interests of the members and stakeholders of the Society and participation in all Board meetings and Board activity programs. The candidate is not a representative or a delegate of the IETF and is not chartered to represent the IETF or the IETF Standards Process within the ISOC Board or the broader ISOC community. However it is expected that the candidate would be able to call on experts in the IETF community as required, to ensure that the ISOC Board receives the highest quality technical advice available. 3. IETF ISOC Board of Trustees Selection Process 3.1. Nominations and eligibility Each year, the IAB will make a public call for nominations on the mailing list. The public call will specify the manner by which nominations will be accepted and the means by which the list of nominees will be published. Self-nominations are permitted. Along with the name and contact information for each candidate, details about the candidate's background and qualifications for the position should be attached to the nomination. All IETF participants, including working group chairs, IETF NomCom members, IAB and IESG members are eligible for nomination. IAB and IESG members who accept nomination will recuse themselves from selection and confirmation discussions respectively. 3.2. Selection The IAB will publish the list of nominated persons, review the nomination material, and make a selection. The selection criteria will include additional consideration of any nominated candidates who are concurrently members of the IAB or IESG members such that at the time of selection no more than two of the three IETF-appointed ISOC Trustees are IAB and IESG members. 3.3. Confirmation The IESG will act as the confirming body for the selection. In the event that the IESG determines not to confirm the nominated candidate, the IESG will provide the IAB with the basis for this determination and the IAB will nominate another candidate. 3.4. Timeframe ISOC expects to seat new Board members at its annual general meeting in June of each year. Basic timeframe requirements for the IETF process are as follows: o 4-6 weeks for solicitation of nominations o 4-6 weeks for review of nominees, deliberation and selection o 4-6 weeks for confirmation (and re-selection as necessary) and delivery to ISOC In January of each year, the IAB will announce the specific dates for the IETF ISOC Trustee selection process for that year (taking into account the particular dates of the first IETF meeting of the year, etc), following the guidelines above. 3.5. Mid-term Vacancies This document describes the process for the general, annual appointment of ISOC Trustees to fill the seats of Trustees whose terms are ending. However, if an IETF-appointed Trustee is unable to serve his or her full term, the IAB may, at its discretion, immediately select a replacement to serve the remainder of the term using the interim process defined in Section 3.5.1. If the IAB does not invoke the interim process, the next annual selection process will fill the vacancy (if the vacant term does not end at that point) as well as the regular appointment for that selection cycle. 3.5.1. Interim Appointment Process If the IAB elects to fill the mid-term vacancy before the next annual selection, a separate timeline will be announced and the rest of the process described in this document will be followed. 4. Security Considerations This document does not describe any technical protocols and has no implications for network security. 5. Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property 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; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication 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 implementors or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director. 6. References [1] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 2727, February 2000. Appendix A. IAB Members at the time of this writing Bernard Aboba Harald Alvestrand Rob Austein Leslie Daigle Patrik Faltstrom Sally Floyd Mark Handley Geoff Huston Jun-ichiro (Itojun) Hagino Charlie Kaufman James Kempf Eric Rescorla Mike St.Johns Authors' Addresses Leslie Daigle Editor Internet Architecture Board IAB EMail: Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). 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 assignees. 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.