Subject: nomcom:Soliciting feedback from entire working groups?

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:37:42 -0500

If I'm reading the following mail correctly, it sounds like the nomcom
is requesting feedback from a working group mailing list.

In other words anyone who creates a tools.ietf.org account for that
address can see the short list of candidates.

At that point, shouldn't we just be making the short list public?

Subject: [Pki4ipsec] Nomcom06: Security Area Director Candidate Feedback
From: Nomcom06 <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 04:13:51 +0100
List-Id: <pki4ipsec.listserv.icsalabs.com>

Security Area Director Candidate Feedback

The NomCom solicits your input on the candidates it is reviewing for
the Security Area Director position.  It is a requirement
of the NomCom process that lists of candidates reviewed by the NomCom
are to be kept confidential. Therefore, when you receive the list of
candidates for review, you MUST keep it confidential and MUST NOT
share it with anyone else.  The NomCom requests that you provide your
input as soon as possible, for full consideration, please have them in no later than the end of the day, Tuesday, January 2, 2007.

Your input is a very important aspect of the process through which the
NomCom will make its selections for IETF leadership.  We encourage you
to review the list of candidates you have been asked to comment on and
provide us any input that might help us in our selection.  Please
provide input on as many candidates as you can; input to the effect of
"I'm not familiar with X" is acceptable and useful to the NomCom.

This year, the NomCom is accepting input on candidates through a
web-based tool.  Later in this message, you will find a URL through
which you can provide your input.

You may be asked for input on multiple positions that are under review
by the NomCom.  If you are asked for input on multiple positions, you
will receive separate e-mail requests for each position.  

If you prefer to provide anonymous input, please send it directly to
the NomCom chair, Andrew Lange, [email-masked], who
will make your input anonymous before forwarding it to the NomCom.  Any 
input you provide, whether it is provided to the NomCom directly through the web-based tool or anonymously, will be kept confidential and will not be shared outside the NomCom.

There are names in the lists of candidates for each position who have
declined nomination, which are included in the list to help protect
the confidentiality of actual candidates.  Also, if you are a
candidate for a position, your name will not appear in the list of
candidates for that position.  If you are a candidate for a position,
the NomCom will not accept anonymous input from you about other
candidates for the same position.

The web-based feedback tool gives the NomCom an automated process for
collecting input on the NomCom candidates.  We hope you will find it
more convenient to use as well.  Your input will be encrypted before
it is stored by the feedback tool, and can only be decrypted by the
NomCom.

Some individuals may be candidates for multiple positions.  If you
provide input for such a candidate for one position, the NomCom will
see that input for that candidate associated with each of the
positions.  You may provide additional input for specific positions,
by clicking on the candidate's name in the list of candidates for that
specific position.

The feedback form is available at the following URLs:

  https://www1.tools.ietf.org/group/nomcom06/input/

Please use your tools.ietf.org login with the email address you have been 
invited with.  If you do not have a tools login, you can get one at this URL:

  https://www1.tools.ietf.org/newlogin

Again, the NomCom emphasizes that, if you use the feedback form to
provide input, you MUST keep the list of candidates confidential.

When you access the feedback form, you will see a list of all of the
candidates you have been asked to comment on.  By clicking on a
candidate's name, you will be presented with a text-input form into
which you can type your input.  

Note that, because of the way in which the NomCom collected names and
e-mail addresses for individuals from whom input is solicited, we may
have more than one e-mail address for you and you may receive multiple
requests for feedback on the same position.  We apologize in advance
for any duplicate e-mail you may receive as a part of this feedback
solicitation process.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Andrew
_______________________________________________
pki4ipsec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/pki4ipsec

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 16:23:24 +0100

Hi Sam,

Commenting only on the possibility of accessing the candidate list,
further down:

> address can see the short list of candidates.

I was alerted to this shortly after the invitations went out, and
removed the list address from the ACL.  

For a short while, somebody requesting a password for that address
(with the confirmation email and authentication hash going to the
same address, thus appearing on the list) could have set a password
and accessed the short list, but that's not possible any more.

	Henrik

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject:
> [Pki4ipsec] Nomcom06: Security Area Director Candidate Feedback
> From:
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>

---

From: Henning Schulzrinne <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:18:29 -0500

Judging from the email addresses where I received solicitations for  
comments, either every RFC author or every I-D author received an  
invitation to comment. (I suspect the latter, since the invitations  
seemed to be tailored by working group, i.e., an I-D in a Transport  
working group "earned" an invitation that included Transport  
candidates.)  Calling a candidate list distributed to all I-D authors  
private is polite fiction. I don't object to this effective public  
candidacy, but honesty in labeling might be called for.

On Dec 18, 2006, at 9:37 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:

> Date: December 17, 2006 10:13:51 PM EST
> input as soon as possible, for full consideration, please have them  
> in no later than the end of the day, Tuesday, January 2, 2007.
>
> input you provide, whether it is provided to the NomCom directly  
> through the web-based tool or anonymously, will be kept  
> confidential and will not be shared outside the NomCom.
>

---

From: "Doug Ewell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 08:38:06 -0800

I received four of these, apparently on the strength of being an RFC 
author, and was immediately sure there had been a mistake.

Henning Schulzrinne wrote:

> candidates.)� Calling a candidate list distributed to all I-D authors 

--
Doug Ewell  *  Fullerton, California, USA  *  RFC 4645  *  UTN #14
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
http://www1.ietf.org/html.charters/ltru-charter.html
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:34:00 -0800

> At that point, shouldn't we just be making the short list public?

1. They are careful to say that the lists that are stuffed with some fake 
entries.  Although I respect the intention, this long-standing technique -- 
attempting to protect the privacy of actual candidates, is ineffective and 
wasteful.  It is particularly wasteful by having lots of folks asked to provide 
feedback about people who are not real candidates.

2. Using some method of restricting the query to "active" wg participants is a 
good idea.  Using the existance of a Tools account is one simple method.  It's 
always worth considering whether there are better criteria that are easy to 
implement, but the current approach is pretty reasonable.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 10:18:42 -0800

I assume that the nominee sub-section labeled "GEN" is really for the IETF Chair?

d/

-- 

   Dave Crocker

---

From: John C Klensin <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:31:35 -0500

> I assume that the nominee sub-section labeled "GEN" is really

I think you should assume, given the number of these things that 
all of us seem to be receiving, that the Nomcom is distributing 
these notes indiscriminately to people who have developed 
documents, reviewed documents, or who participate in various 
mailing lists.

I share the concern of some others that we have promised people 
a confidential process and that this makes short lists (with or 
without ringers) generally available to anyone interested. 
Regardless of whether confidentiality is a good idea, it is what 
the procedures call for and what nominees have been promised.

If that is actually what is going on, then, IMO, the bad 
judgment associated with this decision completely overwhelms the 
bad judgment associated with redrawing the pool after 
consulting, among others, potential nominees and candidates.

     john

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 19:41:33 +0100

Hi Dave,

> I assume that the nominee sub-section labeled "GEN" is really for the IETF Chair?

Yes.  I'll fix that in a moment.

	Henrik

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 22:31:38 +0200

Hi,

Dave Crocker wrote:
>1. They are careful to say that the lists that are stuffed 
>with some fake entries.  Although I respect the intention, 
>this long-standing technique -- attempting to protect the 
>privacy of actual candidates, is ineffective and wasteful.  It 
>is particularly wasteful by having lots of folks asked to 
>provide feedback about people who are not real candidates.
>

I agree. When I was in NomCom two years ago, I was embarrased to see
negative, often very personal, feedback given on folks who had just been
put on the short list as fake entries. Some of these people had even
explicitly turned down their nomination. Of course the NomCom
confidentiality rules apply to that feedback and we never discussed it
even in the NomCom, but it still felt weird.

>2. Using some method of restricting the query to "active" wg 
>participants is a good idea.  Using the existance of a Tools 
>account is one simple method.  It's always worth considering 
>whether there are better criteria that are easy to implement, 
>but the current approach is pretty reasonable.
>

Agree here too. I think it would actually be good to have some kind of
pre-defined criteria on who is asked for feedback. Otherwise *that*
group may lead to bias, for instance there is a lot of input from people
active in certain WGs and very little from others. There's also a chance
that active NomCom members can insert in this group a lot of people they
know to give a certain type of feedback.

I would be in favor of making the short lists public. This semi-secrecy
is creating a way too much speculation and suspicion.

Markus

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2006 09:47:06 +0100

> Yes.  I'll fix that in a moment.

Regardless of that fix, and as a non-candidate, I'll remind everybody
that my personal thoughts about the three roles concerned can be found at
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-ietf-chair-tasks-00.txt

    Brian