Re: Complaining about ADs to Nomcom (Re: Voting (again))

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




Hi John,

At 9:18 AM -0400 5/7/05, John C Klensin wrote:
Whatever the reasons, we don't seem to have enough plausible
candidates to provide reasonable turnover on the IESG (which,
personally, I think would be healthy).

What is "reasonable turnover" for the IESG?

I haven't been on a nomcom, but (from the outside) most of them seem to start with the assumption that they should not change more than 3 IESG members at a time. If that is considered prudent, then we are talking about a situation where a maximum of 1/4 of the IESG will be intentionally replaced each cycle. Factoring in mid-term resignations and the possibility that the nomcom may occasionally make a poor choice requiring quicker turnover, successful ADs who are willing to continue serving will probably be in-office for an average of 8-10 years (4-5 terms). This seems to match existing practice.

What level of turnover do you think would be healthy? And what would be the impacts of having more new ADs each year?

Margaret

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]