|
[Replying to Rich's original post after reading all replies.] I do not have the numbers for all WGs, but I know many WGs where the chairs include a 'newcomer' because, as Rich wrote, getting a pipeline of talents to build the next
gen leadership is critical for all of us (including the IESG). This is indeed mainly about 'new' WGs as it is challenging to remove a chair w/o sounding like a negative action :-( Unsure how to address the latter issue... There are also some sensitive BoFs or WGs where impartial / neutral and experimented chairs are really required for efficiency. As a side note, it is also difficult to find a chair: some public 'job offering' emails have not always received replies... It seems that some areas or some WG are more
attractive than others ;-) Thank you anyway for your interest in the long term of the IETF, Regards -éric PS: and yes, the IESG/IAB did not wait for the good presentation by Geoff Huston (and others) to understand that the end-to-end Internet of pre 2000 is not the same
as today Internet. From: iesg <iesg-bounces@xxxxxxxx> on behalf of "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I noticed that the recent PRIV BOF had a former IETF Chair and a former AD as chairs. I hope that if/when a WG is chartered, that one of those slots will be given to someone new. I also want the Area Directors to look through their working groups and consider asking some experienced people to step down so that their position can be filled by someone new to the role. I
am sure that in some cases it will be a difficult, perhaps even unpleasant, conversation to have. I know that sometimes we used a WG chair position to help a long-time contributor justify their involvement to their employer. For the long-term health of the
organization, we must stop doing that, if only because it goes against our declaration that people participate as individuals. Sent to both the ietf@ and iesg@ mailing list; please be careful about replies. |
