[saag] Re: on derivative work rights statements in emails to Security Area mailing lists

On Mon, Nov 24, 2025 at 1:50 PM Nico Williams <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 23, 2025 at 09:33:34PM -0300, Fernando Gont wrote:
> > On 23/11/2025 13:52, Nico Williams wrote:
> > > How do you defend the IETF in this situation?
> >
> > Well, this is probably a topic for a separate thread. But let's just say
> > [...]
> >
> > At least at some point, in-person participation determined NOMCOM
> > eligibility, etc. which the in turn has an effect on IESG memebrs
> selection.
>
> Yes.  The IETF is costly to participate in (because participants have to
> dedicate a great deal of labor to it, and because of the travel costs,
> and if you want to be in the leadership you must attend all meetings,
>
and if you're a WG chair and you have in-person interims you have to
> attend those too, and if you want to be in the NomCom you have to attend
> many (most?) meetings over some time period, and being an AD is a
> full-time job).


This isn't really right.

- Leadership does skip in-person meetings. I did when I was on the IAB and
  WG chairs routinely chair remotely.
- You do not need to attend *any* meetings in person to participate in the
  nomcom. In fact, as of RFC 9389, you can be on the nomcom having
  attended no meetings at all, in person or remote.
- Being an AD isn't a full time job. The IESG claims [0] that it's 15-25
  hours/week. When I was SEC AD I did it in more like 10. IETF Chair
  probably is a full time job.



> I agree, but that decision has been made, so now we get to argue about
> RFC track, MTI, etc.


As far as I know, nobody is arguing for this document to be on the
standards track or for it to be MTI.

-Ekr

 [0] https://datatracker.ietf.org/nomcom/2025/expertise/#pos-internet-int-ad

_______________________________________________
saag mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]