RFC 2282 (rfc2282) - Page 2 of 14


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



Alternative Format: Original Text Document



RFC 2282                 IAB and IESG Selection            February 1998


   This revision is based on the experience of the 1996 Nominating
   Committee, the first committee to operate according to RFC 2027.  The
   following two assumptions of that specification are also true for
   this revision.

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

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

   The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of
   reference.  The time frames assume that the IETF meets at least once
   per year with that meeting occurring during the North American Spring
   time, i.e., the IETF meets at least on or about March of each year.

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

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

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

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

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

   A final section describes how this document differs from its
   predecessor: RFC 2027.

2.  General

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




Galvin                   Best Current Practice