[dns-wg] reminder about the WG Chair appointment process

> On 25 Nov 2014, at 12:37, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
> 
> On 25/11/2014 12:09, Jim Reid wrote:
>> In case anyone cares, here's that proposed text again.
> 
> Jim, the proposal is non-deterministic.  There's no discriminator in place
> to decide who gets to stand down if N changes and two chairs need to stand
> down at the same time, or if somehow the chair terms become synchronised.
> Drawing lots is fine but where, how, who, what?  What happens if the WG
> goes to blazes and there's only one chair and that chair is subject of a
> mutiny?
> 
> Maybe this isn't important and we can do the usual trick of sweeping it
> under the carpet and pretending that it doesn't exist / isn't a problem /
> oh look at the nice view out the window over there.
> 
> Nick

I agree that this is a (Small) flaw. However we can t actually plan for every eventuality and I think as a group of we are grown up enough to deal with this is a sensible way if it ever comes up..

 - The proposal gets my support..

Michael
 
> 
>> 
>> #
>> #       $Id: appointment,v 1.6 2014/10/06 11:46:56 jim Exp $
>> #
>> [1] The DNS WG will have N co-chairs. N will normally be 2 or 3, as
>> determined by the WG. 
>> 
>> [2] A co-chair will serve a term of N years, where N is the number
>> of co-chairs. Terms will be staggered so that one term expires every
>> year. A co-chair cannot serve more than 2 consecutive terms.
>> 
>> [3] The WG will be given adequate notice that a co-chair's term is
>> ending and to invite applications for that position. Anyone can
>> volunteer for appointment.
>> 
>> [4] At the end of a co-chair's term, the WG will decide by consensus 
>> who is appointed to the available co-chair position. In the event of a
>> tie, the consensus tied candidates will draw lots.
>> 
>> [5] The WG may decide by consensus to remove a WG co-chair at any time.
>> 
>> [6] Consensus will be determined on the DNS WG mailing list. The consensus
>> judgement will be made by the serving WG co-chair(s) and will exclude the
>> co-chair who is the subject of that consensus judgement.
>> 
>> [7] Any appeal over a consensus decision will be heard by the RIPE Chair
>> (or their deputy) whose decision shall be final.
>> 
> 
>