Re: draft-klensin-nomcom-term-00.txt

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

 



Spencer,

I haven't fully analyzed the proposal yet, so I will refrain from
substantive comment.

However, in answer to your question, I'm sure the answer is no,
because the two-stage process suggested in the draft will add a
significant number of weeks to the process, and we would almost
certainly have to start about two months earlier. I haven't done
a detailed analysis of the timeline, but I'm pretty sure we
couldn't make it this year. And that's assuming we reached consensus
very rapidly.

    Brian

Spencer Dawkins wrote:
This draft (available at
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klensin-nomcom-term-00.txt)
does a reasonable job of balancing between current-generation leadership continuity and next-generation leadership development.

I have previously expressed the opinion that an absolute prohibition on four terms of continuous service would be preferable, but the flexibility granted to NOMCOM in this proposal is acceptable (and I could be wrong).

The current IETF is a better place because of several I* members who have returned to the community - they are providing strong technical leadership, without dots on badges. Honorable retirement after honorable service on IESG or IAB is not a bad thing.

If I read RFC 3777 correctly, we will be assembling the next NOMCOM very soon ("at least two months before the Third IETF"). So, I'm wondering...

If there is community consensus that this draft proposes something reasonable, would we give the draft to the incoming NOMCOM as part of their instructions and perform a BCP 93 process experiment?

Spencer


_______________________________________________

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



_______________________________________________

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]