idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits37922/draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 16 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** There are 3 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 4 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (August 1999) is 8308 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '1' Summary: 6 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group J. Galvin 2 INTERNET DRAFT eList eXpress LLC 3 draft-ietf-poisson-nomcom-v2-01.txt August 1999 5 IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: 6 Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees 8 Status of this Memo 10 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 11 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 13 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 14 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 15 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 16 Drafts. 18 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 19 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 20 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 23 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 24 . 26 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 27 . 29 Comments regarding this draft may be sent to the editor as identified 30 on the last page or to the POISSON Working Group of the IETF: 31 . 33 Copyright Notice 35 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved. 37 Abstract 39 The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected, 40 confirmed, and recalled is specified. This document is a self- 41 consistent, organized compilation of the process as it was known at 42 the time of publication. 44 1. Introduction 46 This document is a revision of and supercedes RFC2282. It is a 47 complete specification of the process by which members of the IAB and 48 IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled as of the date of its 49 approval. However, these procedures are subject to change and such 50 change takes effect immediately upon its approval, regardless of 51 whether this document has yet been revised. 53 The following two assumptions continue to be true of this 54 specification. 56 (1) The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and Internet Research 57 Steering Group (IRSG) are not a part of the process described 58 here. 60 (2) The organization (and re-organization) of the IESG is not a 61 part of the process described here. 63 The time frames specified here use IETF meetings as a frame of 64 reference. The time frames assume that the IETF meets at least once 65 per calendar year. This document specifies time frames relative to 66 the first IETF of the calendar year, or simply "First IETF." 68 The remainder of this document is divided into four major topics as 69 follows. 71 General 72 This a set of rules and constraints that apply to the selection 73 and confirmation process as a whole. 75 Nominating Committee Selection 76 This is the process by which volunteers from the IETF community 77 are recognized to serve on the committee that nominates 78 candidates to serve on the IESG and IAB. 80 Nominating Committee Operation 81 This is the set of principles, rules, and constraints that guide 82 the activities of the nominating committee, including the 83 confirmation process. 85 Member Recall 86 This is the process by which the behavior of a sitting member of 87 the IESG or IAB may be questioned, perhaps resulting in the 88 removal of the sitting member. 90 A final section describes how this document differs from its 91 predecessor: RFC2282. 93 2. General 95 The following set of rules apply to the selection and confirmation 96 process as a whole. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the 97 interpretation of each rule is included. 99 (1) The principal functions of the nominating committee are to 100 review the open IESG and IAB positions and to either nominate 101 its incumbent or recruit a superior candidate. 103 The nominating committee does not select the open positions to 104 be reviewed; it is instructed as to which positions to review. 106 At a minimum, the nominating committee will be given the title 107 of the position to be reviewed. The nominating committee may be 108 given a desirable set of qualifications for the candidate 109 nominated to fill each position. 111 Incumbents must notify the nominating committee if they do not 112 wish to be nominated. 114 The nominating committee does not confirm its candidates; it 115 presents its candidates to the appropriate confirming body as 116 indicated below. 118 (2) The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to 119 be completed within 3 months. 121 The annual selection and confirmation process is expected to be 122 completed one month prior to the friday of the week before the 123 First IETF. It is expected to begin 4 months prior to the 124 friday of the week before the First IETF. 126 (3) One-half of each of the then current IESG and IAB positions is 127 selected to be reviewed each year. 129 The intent of this rule to ensure the review of approximately 130 one-half of each of the sitting IESG and IAB members each year. 131 It is recognized that circumstances may exist that will require 132 the nominating committee to review more or less than one-half of 133 the current positions, e.g., if the IESG or IAB have re- 134 organized prior to this process and created new positions, or if 135 there are an odd number of current positions. 137 (4) Confirmed candidates are expected to serve at least a 2 year 138 term. 140 The intent of this rule is to ensure that members of the IESG 141 and IAB serve the number of years that best facilitates the 142 review of one-half of the members each year. 144 It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to 145 choose one or more of the currently open positions to which it 146 may assign a term greater than 2 years in order to ensure the 147 ideal application of this rule in the future. 149 It is consistent with this rule for the nominating committee to 150 choose one or more of the currently open positions that share 151 responsibilities with other positions (both those being reviewed 152 and those sitting) to which it may assign a term greater than 2 153 years to ensure that all such members will not be reviewed at 154 the same time. 156 All sitting member terms end during the First IETF meeting 157 corresponding to the end of the term for which they were 158 confirmed. All confirmed candidate terms begin during the First 159 IETF meeting corresponding to the beginning of the term for 160 which they were confirmed. Normally, the confirmed candidate's 161 term begins when the currently sitting member's term ends on the 162 last day of the meeting. A term may begin or end no sooner than 163 the first day of the meeting and no later than the last day of 164 the meeting as determined by the mutual agreement of the 165 currently sitting member and the confirmed candidate. The 166 confirmed candidate's term may overlap the sitting member's term 167 during the meeting as determined by their mutual agreement. 169 (5) Mid-term vacancies are filled by the same rules as documented 170 here with four qualifications. First, the most recently 171 constituted nominating committee is reconvened to nominate a 172 candidate to fill the vacancy. Second, the selection and 173 confirmation process is expected to be completed within 1 174 month, with all other time periods otherwise unspecified 175 prorated accordingly. Third, the confirming body has two 176 weeks from the day it is notified of a candidate to reject the 177 candidate, otherwise the candidate is assumed to have been 178 confirmed. Fourth, the term of the confirmed candidate will 179 be either: 181 a. the remainder of the term of the open position if that remainder 182 is not less than one year. 184 b. the remainder of the term of the open position plus the next 2 185 year term if that remainder is less than one year. 187 (6) All deliberations and supporting information that relates to 188 specific nominees, candidates, and confirmed candidates are 189 confidential. 191 The nominating committee and confirming body members will be 192 exposed to confidential information as a result of their 193 deliberations, their interactions with those they consult, and 194 from those who provide requested supporting information. All 195 members and all other participants are expected to handle this 196 information in a manner consistent with its sensitivity. 198 It is consistent with this rule for nominating committee members 199 who have served on prior nominating committees to advise the 200 current committee on the deliberations and results of the prior 201 committee, as necessary and appropriate. 203 (7) Unless otherwise specified, the advise and consent model is 204 used throughout the process. This model is characterized as 205 follows. 207 a. The IETF Executive Director advises the nominating committee of 208 the IESG and IAB positions to be reviewed. 210 b. The nominating committee selects candidates and advises the 211 confirming bodies of them. 213 c. The sitting IAB members review the IESG candidates, consenting 214 to some, all, or none. 216 If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the 217 nominating committee with respect to reviewing the open IESG 218 positions is considered complete. If some or none of the 219 candidates are confirmed, the nominating committee must 220 reconvene to select alternate candidates for the rejected 221 candidates. Any additional time required by the nominating 222 committee should not exceed its maximum time allotment. 224 d. The Internet Society Board of Trustees reviews the IAB 225 candidates, consenting to some, all, or none. 227 If all of the candidates are confirmed, the job of the 228 nominating committee with respect to reviewing the open IAB 229 positions is considered complete. If some or none of the 230 candidates are confirmed, the nominating committee must 231 reconvene to select alternate candidates for the rejected 232 candidates. Any additional time required by the nominating 233 committee should not exceed its maximum time allotment. 235 e. The confirming bodies decide their consent according to a 236 mechanism of their own choosing, which must ensure that at least 237 one-half of the sitting members agree with the decision. 239 At least one-half of the sitting members of the confirming 240 bodies must agree to either confirm or reject each individual 241 nominee. The agreement must be decided within a reasonable 242 timeframe. The agreement may be decided by conducting a formal 243 vote, by asserting consensus based on informal exchanges 244 (email), or by whatever mechanism is used to conduct the normal 245 business of the confirming body. 247 3. Nominating Committee Selection 249 The following set of rules apply to the creation of the nominating 250 committee and the selection of its members. 252 (1) The committee comprises at least a non-voting Chair, 10 voting 253 volunteers, and 3 non-voting liaisons. 255 Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting 256 advisor to participate in some or all of the deliberations of 257 the committee. The addition must be approved by both the voting 258 and non-voting members of the committee according to its 259 established voting mechanism. Advisors participate as 260 individuals. 262 Any committee member may propose the addition of a non-voting 263 liaison from other unrepresented organizations to participate in 264 some or all of the deliberations of the committee. The addition 265 must be approved by both the voting and non-voting members of 266 the committee according to its established voting mechanism. 267 Liaisons participate as representatives of their respective 268 organizations. 270 Advisors and liaisons must meet the usual requirements for 271 membership in the nominating committee. In the case of liaisons 272 the requirements apply to the organization not to the 273 individual. 275 (2) The Internet Society President appoints the non-voting Chair, 276 who must meet the usual requirements for membership in the 277 nominating committee. 279 The nominating committee Chair must agree to invest the time 280 necessary to ensure that the nominating committee completes its 281 assigned duties and to perform in the best interests of the IETF 282 community in that role. 284 (3) The Chair obtains the list of IESG and IAB positions to be 285 reviewed and publishes it along with a solicitation for names 286 of volunteers from the IETF community willing to serve on the 287 nominating committee. 289 The list of open positions is published with the solicitation to 290 facilitate community members choosing between volunteering for 291 an open position and volunteering for the nominating committee. 293 The list and solicitation must be publicized using at least the 294 same mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its 295 announcements. 297 (4) Members of the IETF community must have attended at least 2 of 298 the last 3 IETF meetings in order to volunteer. 300 (5) Internet Society Board of Trustees, sitting members of the 301 IAB, and sitting members of the IESG may not volunteer. 303 (6) The Chair announces the pool of volunteers from which the 10 304 voting volunteers will be randomly selected. 306 The announcement must be made using at least the same mechanism 307 used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements. 309 (7) The Chair randomly selects the 10 voting voluteers from the 310 pool of names of volunteers using a method that can be 311 independently verified to be unbiased and fair. 313 A method is fair if each eligible volunteer is equally likely to 314 be selected. A method is unbiased if no one can influence its 315 outcome. 317 The method must include an announcement of an enumerated list of 318 the pool of names together with the specific algorithm for how 319 names will be chosen from the list. The output of the selection 320 algorithm must depend on random data whose value is not known at 321 the time the list and algorithm are announced. 323 One possible method is described in [1]. 325 All announcements must be made using at least the mechanism used 326 by the IETF secretariat for its announcements. 328 (8) The sitting IAB and IESG members each appoint a non-voting 329 liaison to the nominating committee from their current 330 membership who are not sitting in an open position. 332 (9) The Chair of the prior year's nominating committee serves as a 333 non-voting liaison. 335 The prior year's Chair may select a designee from a pool 336 composed of the voting members of the prior year's committee and 337 all prior Chairs if the Chair is unavailable. If the prior 338 year's Chair is unavailable and is unable or unwilling to make 339 such a designation in a timely fashion, the Chair of the current 340 committee may do so. 342 Selecting a prior year's committee member as the designee 343 permits the experience of the prior year's deliberations to be 344 readily available to the current committee. Selecting an 345 earlier prior year Chair as the designee permits the experience 346 of being a Chair as well as that Chair's committee deliberations 347 to be readily available to the current committee. 349 4. Nominating Committee Operation 351 The following rules apply to the operation of the nominating 352 committee. If necessary, a paragraph discussing the interpretation 353 of each rule is included. 355 The rules are organized approximately in the order in which they 356 would be invoked. 358 The term nominee refers to an individual under consideration by the 359 nominating committee. The term candidate refers to a nominee that 360 has been selected by the nominating committee to be considered for 361 confirmation by a confirming body. A confirmed candidate is a 362 candidate that has been reviewed and approved by a confirming body. 364 (1) All rules and special circumstances not otherwise specified 365 are at the discretion of the committee. 367 Exceptional circumstances will occasionally arise during the 368 normal operation of the nominating committee. This rule is 369 intended to foster the continued forward progress of the 370 committee. 372 Any member of the committee may propose a rule for adoption by 373 the committee. The rule must be approved by both the voting and 374 non-voting members of the committee according to its established 375 voting mechanism. 377 All members of the committee should consider whether the 378 exception is worthy of mention in the next revision of this 379 document and followup accordingly. 381 (2) The Chair must establish and publicize milestones, which must 382 include at least a call for nominations. 384 There is a defined time period during which the selection and 385 confirmation process must be completed. The Chair must 386 establish a set of milestones which, if met in a timely fashion, 387 will result in the completion of the process on time. The Chair 388 should allow time for iterating the activities of the committee 389 if one or more candidates is not confirmed. 391 The milestones must be publicized using at least the same 392 mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements. 394 (3) The Chair must establish a voting mechanism. 396 The committee must be able to objectively determine when a 397 decision has been made during its deliberations. The criteria 398 for determining closure must be established and known to all 399 members of the nominating committee. 401 (4) At least a quorum of committee members must participate in a 402 vote. A quorum comprises at least 7 voting members. 404 (5) The Chair may establish a process by which a member of the 405 nominating committee may be recalled. 407 The process, if established, must be agreed to by a 3/4 majority 408 of the members of the nominating committee, including the non- 409 voting members since they would be subject to the same process. 411 (6) All members of the nominating committee may participate in all 412 deliberations. 414 The emphasis of this rule is that no member, whether voting or 415 non-voting, can be explicitly excluded from any deliberation. 416 However, a member may individually choose not to participate in 417 a deliberation. 419 (7) The Chair announces the open positions to be reviewed and the 420 call for nominees. 422 The call for nominees must include a request for comments 423 regarding the past performance of incumbents, which will be 424 considered during the deliberations of the nominating committee. 426 The announcements must be publicized using at least the same 427 mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements. 429 (8) Any member of the IETF community may nominate any member of 430 the IETF community for any open position. 432 A self-nomination is permitted. 434 (9) Nominating committee members must not be nominees. 436 To be a nominee is to enter the process of being selected as a 437 candidate and confirmed. Nominating committee members are not 438 eligible to be considered for filling any open position. They 439 become ineligible as soon as their role is announced to the IETF 440 community and they remain ineligible for the duration of this 441 nominating committee's term. 443 (10) Members of the IETF community who were recalled from any IESG 444 or IAB position during the previous two years must not be 445 nominees. 447 (11) The nominating committee selects candidates based on its 448 understanding of the IETF community's consensus of the 449 qualifications required to fill the open positions. 451 The intent of this rule is to ensure that the nominating 452 committee consults with a broad base of the IETF community for 453 input to its deliberations. 455 The consultations are permitted to include a slate of nominees, 456 if all parties to the consultation agree to observe customary 457 and reasonable rules of confidentiality. 459 A broad base of the community should include the existing 460 members of the IAB and IESG, especially sitting members who 461 share responsibilities with open positions, e.g., co-Area 462 Directors. 464 (12) Nominees should be advised that they are being considered and 465 must consent to their nomination prior to being confirmed. 467 The nominating committee should help nominees provide 468 justification to their employers. 470 A nominee's consent must be written (email is acceptable) and 471 include a commitment to provide the resources necessary to fill 472 the open position and an assurance that the nominee will perform 473 the duties of the position for which they are being considered 474 in the best interests of the IETF community. 476 (13) The nominating committee advises the confirming bodies of 477 their candidates, specifying a single candidate for each open 478 position and a testament as to how each candidate meets the 479 qualifications of an open position. 481 The testament may include a brief resume of the candidate and a 482 summary of the deliberations of the nominating committee. 484 (14) With respect to any action to be taken in the context of 485 notifying and announcing confirmed candidates, and notifying 486 rejected nominees and candidates, the action must be valid 487 according to all of the rules specified below prior to its 488 execution. 490 a. Up until a candidate is confirmed, the identity of the candidate 491 must be kept confidential. 493 b. The identity of all nominees must be kept confidential (except 494 that the nominee may publicize their intentions). 496 c. Rejected nominees may be notified as soon as they are rejected. 498 d. Rejected candidates may be notified as soon as they are 499 rejected. 501 e. Rejected nominees and candidates must be notified prior to 502 announcing confirmed candidates. 504 f. Confirmed candidates may be notified and announced as soon as 505 they are confirmed. 507 It is consistent with these rules for a nominee to never know if 508 they were a candidate or not. 510 It is consistent with these rules for some nominees to be 511 rejected early in the process and for some nominees to be kept 512 as alternates in case a candidate is rejected by a confirming 513 body. In the matter of whether a confirmed candidate was a 514 first choice or an alternate, that information need not ever be 515 disclosed and, in fact, probably never should be. 517 It is consistent with these rules for confirmed candidates to be 518 notified and announced as quickly as possible instead of 519 requiring all confirmed candidates to wait until all open 520 positions have been reviewed. 522 When consulting with individual members of the IETF community, 523 if all parties to the consultation agree to observe customary 524 and reasonable rules of confidentiality the consultations are 525 permitted to include a slate of nominees. 527 The announcements must be publicized using at least the same 528 mechanism used by the IETF secretariat for its announcements. 530 5. Member Recall 532 The following rules apply to the recall process. If necessary, a 533 paragraph discussing the interpretation of each rule is included. 535 (1) Anyone may request the recall of any sitting IAB or IESG 536 member, at any time, upon written (email is acceptable) 537 request with justification to the Internet Society President. 539 (2) Internet Society President shall appoint a Recall Committee 540 Chair. 542 The Internet Society President must not evaluate the recall 543 request. It is explicitly the responsibility of the IETF 544 community to evaluate the behavior of its leaders. 546 (3) The recall committee is created according to the same rules as 547 is the nominating committee with the qualifications that the 548 person being investigated and the person requesting the recall 549 must not be a member of the recall committee in any capacity. 551 (4) The recall committee operates according to the same rules as 552 the nominating committee with the qualification that there is 553 no confirmation process. 555 (5) The recall committee investigates the circumstances of the 556 justification for the recall and votes on its findings. 558 The investigation must include at least both an opportunity for 559 the member being recalled to present a written statement and 560 consultation with third parties. 562 (6) A 3/4 majority of the members who vote on the question is 563 required for a recall. 565 (7) If a sitting member is recalled the open position is to be 566 filled according to the mid-term vacancy rules. 568 6. Changes From RFC2282 570 Editorial changes are not described here, only substantive 571 changes. They are listed here in the order in which they appear 572 in the document. 574 (1) The frame of reference for timeframes was changed from the 575 seasonal "Spring IETF" reference to the less geographic and 576 more temporal "First IETF" reference. 578 (2) The terms of the sitting members and their respective 579 confirmed candidates is explicitly permitted to overlap during 580 the First IETF as determined by their mutual agreement. 582 (3) Nominating committee members who have served on prior 583 committees are explicitly permitted to advise the current 584 committee on the deliberations and results of the prior 585 committtee. 587 (4) The role and opportunity for additional advisors and liaisons 588 to the nominating committee was clarified. 590 (5) A reference to a documented and accepted fair and unbiased 591 mechanism for randomly selecting nominating committee members 592 from the pool of volunteers was added. 594 (6) The option for the prior year's Chair to select a designee to 595 serve as liaison to the current year's committee was clarified 596 to ensure the Chair selected a non-voting liaison from a pool 597 composed of the prior year's voting members and all prior 598 committee Chairs. 600 (7) The responsibility and authority for the activities of the 601 nominating committee rests with the committee as a whole, not 602 with the Chair. The operation of the committee was clarified 603 to require changes in process and the handling of exceptions 604 to be approved by the committee as a whole as opposed to being 605 at the discretion of the Chair. 607 (8) The rule that prevented nominating committee members from 608 being eligible to be considered for any open position was 609 clarified to explicitly state that the rule applies from the 610 point in time that the committee membership is announced 611 through the entire term of the current committee. 613 7. Acknowledgements 615 There have been a number of people involved with the development of 616 this document over the years. A great deal of credit goes to the 617 first three Nominating Committee Chairs: 619 1993 - Jeff Case 621 1994 - Fred Baker 623 1995 - John Curran 625 who had the pleasure of operating without the benefit of a documented 626 process. It was their fine work and oral tradition that became the 627 first version of this document. Of course we can not overlook the 628 bug discovery burden that each of the Chairs since the first 629 publication have had to endure: 631 1996 - Guy Almes 633 1997 - Geoff Houston 635 1998 - Mike St. Johns 637 1999 - Donald Eastlake 639 Of course the bulk of the credit goes to the members of the POISSON 640 Working Group, previously the POISED Working Group. The prose here 641 would not be what it is were it not for the attentive and insightful 642 review of its members. Specific acknowledgement must be extended to 643 Scott Bradner and John Klensin, who have consistently contributed to 644 the improvement of this document throughout its evolution. 646 8. Security Considerations 648 Any selection, confirmation, or recall process necessarily involves 649 investigation into the qualifications and activities of prospective 650 candidates. The investigation may reveal confidential or otherwise 651 private information about candidates to those participating in the 652 process. Each person who participates in any aspect of the process 653 has a responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of any and all 654 information not explicitly identified as suitable for public 655 dissemination. 657 9. References 659 [1] Eastlake, D., "Publicly Verifiable Nomcom Random Selection", 660 Work in progress. 662 10. Editor's Address 664 James M. Galvin 665 eList eXpress LLC 666 607 Trixsam Road 667 Sykesville, MD 21784 668 galvin@elistx.com 670 Table of Contents 672 Status of this Memo ........................................... 1 673 Copyright Notice .............................................. 1 674 Abstract ...................................................... 1 675 1 Introduction ................................................. 2 676 2 General ...................................................... 3 677 3 Nominating Committee Selection ............................... 6 678 4 Nominating Committee Operation ............................... 8 679 5 Member Recall ................................................ 12 680 6 Changes From RFC2282 ......................................... 13 681 7 Acknowledgements ............................................. 14 682 8 Security Considerations ...................................... 15 683 9 References ................................................... 15 684 10 Editor's Address ............................................ 15