[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Selecting the IETF candidates for ICANN PSO positions

Erik and all,

  I would propose the following for determination of candidates for the
PSO council so as to properly comply with the precepts and
requirements of the White Paper and the ICANN/NTIA MoU:

1.) Any and all whom are interested parties may openly announce their
     interest as a candidate for the PSO Council.  No restrictions on
     numbers of Candidates.

2.) Any and all of those that do announce for Candidacy for the PSO
     Council must do so in a given span (Say, 10 days) of time on either
     the ICANN  "Public Comments" Mailing list or the Poission list here.

3.) All candidates will be elected by the ICANN At-Large Membership
     and/or IETF members.  The election to be held on-line in a given
     pre announced span of time. (Say, 10 days)

4.) Any and all elected Council members, once elected will be in
     service to the ICANN At-Large membership for whatever duties
     that membership deems appropriate or otherwise necessary.

Erik Huizer wrote:

> I have seen little discussion on this, slightly in favor of the PSO
> council members be chosen from amidst IAB members, but not enough for
> me to judge rough consensus. Sine the alternative suggested is NOMCOM
> selection, let me re-itterate my own proposal that received no comments
> (positive or negative) that I am aware of, and that does seem to strike
> a good compromise.
> I send to this list the following on this topic:
> 1) We like to have the officers within ICANN PSO selected through
> the nomcom process.
> 2) We would also like to see that the protocol
> council do as little as possible and that it does not go out shopping
> for work.
> 3) We also like to give sufficient cloud to the council candidates and
> we
> like them to be aware of the current IETF issues.
> 4) We don't want to burden the nomcom with finding even more people
> for more functions.
> So 1) argues for nomcom selected candidates, while 2,3 and 4 argue for
> IAB members taking the two PSO council slots.
> So here's my engineers proposal:
> Currently the voting members of the IAB are nominated by the nomcom.
> These members are nominated "at-large" without any specific functions.
> I propose we change this slightly. We keep the same total amount of
> voting IAB members but assign two of those specifically with the task
> of being the IETF nominated PSO council members. The nomcom appoints
> these IAB members as well as the other voting IAB members. So it is
> the nomcom that decides which IAB member is also PSO council member.
> This way we satisfy 1, 2, 3 and 4 above.
> I realise we have a bootstrap problem, but it should not be too
> difficult to find a solution to that problem. Let me first hear
> whether you agree that this is a good solution.
> Let me note that the above is only valid for the two PSO council
> seats. The IETF also has to select candidate(s) for the ICANN Board
> seats for the PSO. I think these selections (the final nomination will
> be by the PSO council) will HAVE TO be done by the nomcom (except
> maybe in the boorstrap phase), I see no other way.
> Erik


Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208