Network Working Group S. Dawkins, Ed.
Request for Comments: 5680 Huawei (USA)
BCP: 10 October 2009
Updates: 3777
Category: Best Current Practice
Network Working Group S. Dawkins, Ed.
Request for Comments: 5680 Huawei (USA)
BCP: 10 October 2009
Updates: 3777
Category: Best Current Practice
The Nominating Committee Process: Open Disclosure of Willing Nominees
提名委员会程序：公开披露自愿提名人
Abstract
摘要
This document updates RFC 3777, Section 3, Bullet 6 to allow a Nominating and Recall Committee to disclose the list of nominees who are willing to be considered to serve in positions the committee is responsible for filling.
本文件更新了RFC 3777第3节第6项，以允许提名和罢免委员会披露愿意被考虑担任委员会负责填补的职位的被提名人名单。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
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.
本文件规定了互联网社区的最佳现行做法，并要求进行讨论和提出改进建议。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2009 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the BSD License.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。请仔细阅读这些文件，因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括《信托法律条款》第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可文本，并且提供BSD许可中所述的代码组件时不提供任何担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. Current Rules on Confidentiality ................................2
3. Problems with Existing Rules ....................................3
4. Asking the Entire Community for Feedback ........................4
5. Disclosing a Nominee List .......................................4
6. Updated Text from RFC 3777 ......................................5
7. Security Considerations .........................................6
8. Acknowledgements ................................................6
9. Normative References ............................................6
Appendix A. Concerns about Open Nominee Lists .....................6
1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. Current Rules on Confidentiality ................................2
3. Problems with Existing Rules ....................................3
4. Asking the Entire Community for Feedback ........................4
5. Disclosing a Nominee List .......................................4
6. Updated Text from RFC 3777 ......................................5
7. Security Considerations .........................................6
8. Acknowledgements ................................................6
9. Normative References ............................................6
Appendix A. Concerns about Open Nominee Lists .....................6
The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG), the Internet Architecture Board (IAB), and at-large IETF representatives to the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) are selected by a "Nominating and Recall Committee" (universally abbreviated as "NomCom"). [RFC3777] defines how the NomCom is selected, and the processes it follows as it selects candidates for these positions.
互联网工程指导小组（IESG）、互联网体系结构委员会（IAB）以及IETF行政监督委员会（IAOC）的IETF代表由“提名和召回委员会”（普遍缩写为“NomCom”）选出。[RFC3777]定义如何选择NomCom，以及为这些职位选择候选人时遵循的流程。
The NomCom is responsible for filling positions across the breadth of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). The NomCom needs relevant information about nominees being considered for these positions, but current [RFC3777] requirements for confidentiality limit the ability of the NomCom to solicit that information. The process change described in this document allows the NomCom to openly solicit information about nominees who are willing to be considered.
NomCom负责填补整个互联网工程任务组（IETF）的职位。NomCom需要关于这些职位被提名人的相关信息，但目前[RFC3777]的保密要求限制了NomCom获取该信息的能力。本文件中描述的流程变更允许NomCom公开征求愿意被考虑的被提名人的信息。
[RFC3777] is the latest in a series of revisions to the NomCom process, and it describes the confidential nature of NomCom deliberations in Section 3, "General", bullet 6, which states:
[RFC3777]是对NomCom流程进行的一系列修订中的最新版本，它在第3节“概述”，项目符号6中描述了NomCom审议的保密性质，其中规定：
All deliberations and supporting information that relates to specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are confidential.
与特定提名人、候选人和确认候选人相关的所有审议和支持信息均为机密信息。
The nominating committee and confirming body members will be exposed to confidential information as a result of their deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and from those who provide requested supporting information. All members and all other participants are expected to handle this information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity.
提名委员会和确认机构成员将因其审议、与咨询者的互动以及提供所需支持信息的人的互动而接触到机密信息。所有成员和所有其他参与者应以与其敏感性一致的方式处理此信息。
It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise the current committee on deliberations and results of the prior committee, as necessary and appropriate.
根据这一规则，在先前提名委员会任职的现任提名委员会成员可在必要和适当的情况下，就先前委员会的审议情况和结果向现任委员会提出建议。
There are two problems with existing practice -- nominee lists aren't as confidential as [RFC3777] would lead the reader to believe, but they aren't visible to the entire IETF community, either.
现有实践中存在两个问题——被提名人名单不像[RFC3777]让读者相信的那样保密，但整个IETF社区也看不到。
Since at least 1996, most NomComs have sent out a "short list" of nominees under consideration to a variety of audiences. The target audiences differ from year to year, but have included members of specific leadership bodies, working group chairs in a specific area (for IESG positions), all working group chairs (for IAB and IAOC positions), and all document authors. The combined target audience for all short lists includes hundreds of recipients -- recent NomComs have sent out about 1500 requests for short list feedback.
至少从1996年起，大多数NOMCOM都向不同的受众发送了一份“候选名单”。目标受众每年不同，但包括特定领导机构的成员、特定领域的工作组主席（针对IESG职位）、所有工作组主席（针对IAB和IAOC职位）以及所有文件作者。所有短名单的综合目标受众包括数百名接收者——最近的NOMCOM发出了大约1500个短名单反馈请求。
This practice is unavoidable, because most NomCom members will not have personal experience with most nominees for most positions, but it is periodically challenged because it's not explicitly allowed as an exception to the blanket requirement for confidentiality.
这种做法是不可避免的，因为大多数NomCom成员在大多数职位上不会有与大多数提名人的个人经验，但它会定期受到质疑，因为它没有明确允许作为保密性总体要求的例外。
In an attempt to maintain the required level of confidentiality, past NomComs have also included "ringers" (as "padding") on the short list -- nominees who are NOT under active consideration for a specific position. Since anyone who sees the short list does not know who the ringers are, conscientious IETF participants also provide feedback on nominees who have already declined. This is a waste of precious IETF-participant cycles, and there are widespread reports that strict confidentiality about which candidates are "real", and which are included as "padding", is not successfully maintained in practice.
为了保持所需的保密水平，过去的NOMCOM还将“打电话者”（作为“填充”）列入了短名单，即未被积极考虑担任特定职位的被提名人。因为任何看到短名单的人都不知道谁是打电话者，认真的IETF参与者也会对已经拒绝的被提名人提供反馈。这是对宝贵的IETF参与者周期的浪费，并且有广泛的报告表明，在实践中，对于哪些候选人是“真实的”，哪些被列为“填充”，并没有成功地保持严格的保密性。
Even if confidentiality about padding is maintained, the community is aware that some nominees on the short list aren't under active consideration. In some cases, people have guessed incorrectly that an actual nominee is part of the padding, and didn't provide needed feedback to the NomCom about a nominee who was actively being considered.
即使保持了关于填充的保密性，社区也意识到短名单上的一些被提名人并没有得到积极考虑。在某些情况下，人们错误地猜测实际的被提名人是填充的一部分，并且没有向NomCom提供关于积极被考虑的被提名人的必要反馈。
We also note that the practice of disclosing a "short list" penalizes IETF participants who aren't members of one of the target audiences being surveyed -- they have no way of knowing who is being considered, except for incumbent(s), and have little incentive to provide feedback to the NomCom on individuals who might not even be nominees.
我们还注意到，披露“短名单”的做法会惩罚那些不是被调查目标受众之一成员的IETF参与者——他们无法知道被考虑的人是谁，除了现任者，也没有动力向NomCom提供关于甚至可能不是被提名者的个人的反馈。
NomComs are not required to ask for community input at all, but at the current IETF scale, many NomComs do request community input, because members do not have personal experience with all nominees for all positions under review.
NOMCOM根本不需要要求社区提供意见，但在目前的IETF规模下，许多NOMCOM确实要求社区提供意见，因为成员没有与所有被审查职位的所有提名人接触的个人经验。
We assume that asking the larger community for feedback about these nominees is preferable to NomCom members without personal experience simply deferring to the members of the NomCom who do have personal experience with specific nominees.
我们假设，与没有个人经验的NomCom成员相比，向更大的社区征求关于这些被提名人的反馈意见更可取，只是简单地听从与特定被提名人有个人经验的NomCom成员的意见。
We assume that asking for feedback from the entire community is preferable to asking for feedback from large segments of the community, while keeping the rest of the community "in the dark".
我们认为，征求整个社区的反馈比征求社区大部分人的反馈更可取，同时让社区其他人“蒙在鼓里”。
In proposing that a nominee list be disclosed as part of the NomCom's request for feedback from the community, we considered three possibilities:
在提议披露提名名单作为NomCom要求社区反馈的一部分时，我们考虑了三种可能性：
1. Asking for feedback on all nominees, whether or not they are willing to be considered.
1. 询问所有被提名人的反馈，无论他们是否愿意被考虑。
2. Asking for feedback on all nominees who are willing to be considered.
2. 询问所有愿意被考虑的被提名人的反馈。
3. Asking for feedback on the nominees that the NomCom is seriously considering (the "short list").
3. 要求获得NomCom正在认真考虑的提名人的反馈（“短名单”）。
Asking for feedback on nominees who are not willing to be considered is a waste of precious IETF-participant cycles, and may make it less likely that the NomCom would receive feedback on some nominees who ARE willing to be considered.
询问不愿意被考虑的被提名人的反馈是对宝贵的IETF参与者周期的浪费，并且可能会降低NomCom收到一些愿意被考虑的被提名人反馈的可能性。
Asking for feedback on all nominees who are willing to be considered allows the community to point out specific strengths and weaknesses of all willing nominees, and this feedback should be useful to the NomCom in deciding which nominees to seriously consider. It also allows the NomCom to receive feedback on nominees who might not appear on a "short list" initially, in the event that a strong nominee is suddenly unwilling or unable to serve.
对所有愿意被考虑的提名者提出反馈意见，允许社区指出所有愿意被提名者的特定优势和弱点，而这一反馈对NoMCOM在决定认真考虑哪些提名者方面是有用的。它还允许NomCom收到关于最初可能不会出现在“短名单”上的被提名人的反馈，如果一个强有力的被提名人突然不愿意或无法任职。
We also note that the list of willing nominees will include incumbents who are willing to be considered for an additional term.
我们还注意到，自愿被提名者名单将包括愿意被考虑延长任期的现任者。
At the end of the three paragraphs in [RFC3777], Section 3, "General", bullet 6, which are currently:
在[RFC3777]第3节“概述”第6项中的三段末尾，目前为：
All deliberations and supporting information that relates to specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are confidential.
与特定提名人、候选人和确认候选人相关的所有审议和支持信息均为机密信息。
The nominating committee and confirming body members will be exposed to confidential information as a result of their deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and from those who provide requested supporting information. All members and all other participants are expected to handle this information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity.
提名委员会和确认机构成员将因其审议、与咨询者的互动以及提供所需支持信息的人的互动而接触到机密信息。所有成员和所有其他参与者应以与其敏感性一致的方式处理此信息。
It is consistent with this rule for current nominating committee members who have served on prior nominating committees to advise the current committee on deliberations and results of the prior committee, as necessary and appropriate.
根据这一规则，在先前提名委员会任职的现任提名委员会成员可在必要和适当的情况下，就先前委员会的审议情况和结果向现任委员会提出建议。
add the following paragraphs:
增加以下段落：
The list of nominees willing to be considered for positions under review in the current NomCom cycle is not confidential. The NomCom may disclose a list of names of nominees who are willing to be considered for positions under review to the community, in order to obtain feedback from the community on these nominees.
在当前的NomCom周期内，愿意被考虑担任受审查职位的被提名人名单并不保密。NomCom可向社区披露愿意被考虑担任审查职位的被提名人名单，以获得社区对这些被提名人的反馈。
The list of nominees disclosed for a specific position should contain only the names of nominees who are willing to be considered for the position under review.
为特定职位披露的被提名人名单应仅包含愿意被考虑担任所审查职位的被提名人的姓名。
The NomCom may choose not to include some names in the disclosed list, at their discretion.
NomCom可自行决定不将某些姓名列入披露名单。
The NomCom may disclose an updated list, at their discretion. For example, the NomCom might disclose an updated list if the NomCom identifies errors/omissions in a previously disclosed version of the disclosed list, or if the NomCom finds it necessary to call for additional nominees, and these nominees indicate a willingness to be considered before the NomCom has completed its deliberations.
NomCom可自行决定披露最新名单。例如，如果NomCom在先前披露的清单版本中发现错误/遗漏，或者如果NomCom发现有必要召集其他提名人，并且这些提名人表示愿意在NomCom完成审议之前接受审议，则NomCom可能会披露更新的清单。
Nominees may choose to ask people to provide feedback to the NomCom, but should not encourage any public statements of support. NomComs should consider nominee-encouraged lobbying and campaigning to be unacceptable behavior.
被提名人可以选择要求他人向NomCom提供反馈，但不应鼓励任何公开的支持声明。提名者应该考虑被提名者鼓励游说和竞选活动是不可接受的行为。
IETF community members are encouraged to provide feedback on nominees to the NomCom, but should not post statements of support/ non-support for nominees in any public forum.
鼓励IETF社区成员向NomCom提供关于被提名人的反馈，但不应在任何公共论坛上发布支持/不支持被提名人的声明。
This specification describes issues with the current IETF Nominating Committee process ([RFC3777]) and proposes an update to allow the NomCom to solicit feedback from the entire community on nominees under consideration. No security considerations apply.
本规范描述了当前IETF提名委员会流程（[RFC3777]）的问题，并提出了更新建议，以允许NomCom征求整个社区对正在考虑的提名人的反馈意见。没有安全考虑。
The editor thanks the following folks who have provided useful observations and guidance on previous versions of this document: Fred Baker, Ross Callon, Brian Carpenter, Leslie Daigle, Lars Eggert, Robert Elz, Joel Halpern, Bernie Hoeneisen, John Klensin, Barry Leiba, Danny McPherson, S. Moonesamy, and Thomas Narten.
编辑感谢以下人士，他们对本文件的前几个版本提供了有用的观察和指导：弗雷德·贝克、罗斯·卡隆、布赖恩·卡彭特、莱斯利·戴格尔、拉尔斯·艾格特、罗伯特·埃尔兹、乔尔·哈尔佩恩、伯尼·霍内森、约翰·克伦、巴里·莱巴、丹尼·麦克弗森、S·穆内萨米和托马斯·纳滕。
The editor also thanks IETF plenary meeting participants who have provided useful feedback on previous versions of this document.
编辑还感谢IETF全体会议的与会者，他们就本文件的以前版本提供了有用的反馈。
[RFC3777] Galvin, J., "IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees", BCP 10, RFC 3777, June 2004.
[RFC3777]Galvin，J.，“IAB和IESG选择、确认和召回流程：提名和召回委员会的运作”，BCP 10，RFC 3777，2004年6月。
This section acknowledges possible concerns about disclosing open nominee lists in previous NomCom-related discussions. Thanks to Leslie Daigle for providing this set of concerns to the document editor.
本节承认，在先前与野马通信相关的讨论中，可能会对披露公开的被提名人名单感到担忧。感谢Leslie Daigle为文档编辑器提供了这组关注点。
One concern is that nominees who are willing to be considered if the nominee list is not disclosed would not be willing to be considered if the nominee list is disclosed. This reluctance might be cultural, the result of personal pride, or the result of the fear of retribution for a nominee being considered as a replacement for the nominee's managing Area Director (this concern is usually raised in an IESG context).
一个担忧是，如果未披露被提名人名单，愿意被考虑的被提名人将不愿意在披露被提名人名单的情况下被考虑。这种不情愿可能是文化、个人自豪感的结果，或者是被提名人被视为替代被提名人的常务区域总监而害怕受到惩罚的结果（这种担心通常在IESG的背景下提出）。
Another concern is that publishing the nominee list publicly would lead to "lobbying", public statements supporting nominees on the IETF mailing list, etc.
另一个担忧是，公开公布被提名人名单将导致“游说”、公开声明支持IETF邮寄名单上的被提名人等。
Author's Address
作者地址
Spencer Dawkins (editor) Huawei Technologies (USA)
斯宾塞·道金斯（编辑）华为技术（美国）
Phone: +1 214 755 3870
EMail: spencer@wonderhamster.org
Phone: +1 214 755 3870
EMail: spencer@wonderhamster.org