From: "Susan R. Harris" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 08:30:16 -0400 (EDT)
>Below are Poisson minutes from the 45th IETF, Oslo.
>Erik noted that consensus had been reached on the email list concerning
>the "IETF Discussion List Charter," draft-ietf-poisson-listaup-00.txt. He
>will now issue a formal last call to the WG, and the document will be
>submitted to the IESG as a BCP.
>Brian Carpenter reported that the IETF - IANA contract has now been
>completed. Randy Bush congratulated the IANA for its superior performance
>for many years on behalf of the Internet.
>The group accepted the changes present in version 2 of "IAB and IESG
>Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating
>and Recall Committees," draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2-00.txt. As reported
>by Jim Galvin, those changes are:
>- In honor of the upcoming Adelaide meeting, the accepted terminology
> for IETF meetings is now geographic, rather than temporal, i.e., we'll
> now refer to each year's "first IETF," rather than the "Spring IETF."
>- Previously, all nomcom member terms began and ended during the
> first IETF meeting corresponding to the end of the term for which they
> were confirmed. Now, it is possible to have member terms overlap
> during the IETF meeting, if both members agree that they would like the
> opportunity to work together during the conference.
I believe this was for IESG members, not nomcom members. See Section
2, item 4.
>- If a member of a previous nomcom wishes to communicate some sort
> of relevant information to the current committee, it is perfectly
> acceptable to do so.
>- Any nomcom member may propose the addition of a non-voting
> advisor to participate in some or all of the deliberations of the
> committee. There was discussion as to whether there should be a limit of
> four advisors, and the consensus was that there should be no such limit.
> Similarly, any nomcom member may propose the addition of a non-voting
> liaison from other unrepresented organizations to participate in
> some or all of the deliberations of the committee.
>- The document now notes that the Chair selects the 10 voting volunteers
> using an unbiased and fair method. Donald Eastlake has kindly prepared an a
> additional document specifying how to make "fair" choices from the pool of
> nominees. This document is an informative reference, not a normative one.
>- If the Chair finds that he or she will not be able to participate
> in the next year's nomcom activities, their replacement should come from
> the pool of prior years' Chairs, rather than from the current member
> body. This expands the pool of candidates, and ensures that a member
> seat will not become vacant if a member is selected as the next Chair.
It exapnds the pool because it can come from EITHER the previous
year's voting members or previous nomcom chairs.
>- The nomcom will now place less discretion on the Chair, and more on
> the committee itself. For example, the entire committee will now
> approve the appointment of a liaison, rather than the Chair alone.
>- The document now states explicitly that when someone becomes a
> member of the nomcom, they are no longer eligible for an open position.
>Donald noted that the document does not explicitly outline procedures
>for launching and carrying out a recall process. It was decided to move
>this discussion to the mailing list. If considerable discussion ensues,
>the issue will be treated separately from the rest of the draft to ensure
>the draft's timely publication. If there is little or no comment,
>appropriate language concerning recall procedures will be added to the
>Scott Bradner provided a status update on the ICANN Protocol Supporting
>Organization (PSO), which is being created by an MOU among ICANN and an
>international group of standards development organizations (SDO's). (See
>"A Proposal for an MOU-Based ICANN Protocol Support Organization,"
>draft-ietf-poisson-mou-pso-00.txt.) By way of background, Scott briefly
>outlined the history of the PSO, which provides for technical review of
>proposals that come before ICANN. The PSO cannot tell the SDO's how they
>should set standards; rather, its role is to facilitate discussion between
>two SDO's if a dispute arises between them.
>One of the issues discussed at the Minneapolis IETF was the organizational
>relationship between the PSO and ICANN. It was determined that the PSO
>would be a part of ICANN, not a separate organization. With this and many
>other matters resolved, a proposal describing the PSO was submitted to
>ICANN, which published the proposal for public comment. The proposal was
>then approved by the ICANN board, and the next step was to work out the
>The group discussed how much advance notice should be required for open
>meetings of the PSO Protocol Council. It was decided that 45 days
>provides adequate notice for physical meetings, and the MOU will be
>modified accordingly. Another change concerns individual appointees of
>the SDO's: they will now be renewed annually in order to avoid the
>appearance of lifetime appointments.
>Scott noted that the next steps for the IETF are to:
> 1) modify the MOU based on the above changes
> 2) sign the MOU at the evening plenary session
> 3) nominate the IETF's representative Protocol Council members
> 4) select the IETF candidate(s) for the PSO's ICANN Board members seats.
>Scott's presentation was followed by a discussion of whether the IETF
>should be a signatory to the MOU, along with the other SDO's (W3C, ITU,
>and the European Technical Standards Institute, ETSI). It was determined
>that all the signatories meet the SDO criteria outlined in the MOU now, or
>are expected to meet them within the next six months. The group therefore
>showed clear consensus in favor of the IETF signing the MOU that evening.
>Fred Baker closed the meeting by thanking Erik Huizer for his outstanding
>job leading the POISSON group during the past four years. Erik has
>resigned his position in order to take up a new role as head of the IRTF.
>The new POISSON chairs will be Jim Galvin and John Klensin. With this
>transition, the group will be re-chartered and will become a mailing-list
>group, with IETF working group meetings suspended for the time being.