[I'm sorry to be joining this discussion late.] I see several different goals in John's draft: 1. Setting guidelines for length of service. 2. Early notification to incumbents. 3. Reducing the nomcom's workload. I think giving the nomcom more guidance about appropriate length of service is a fine thing. (And I tend to agree that service beyond three terms should be unusual.) Having a generally-recognized length of service would help generate candidates to replace a well-regarded AD who has served several terms. I think announcing early decisions regarding incumbents is not good. I think there's great value in looking at the slate of candidates as a whole. I don't like the idea of making a decision about an incumbent without seeing the pool of potential replacements. The goal of simplifying life for the nomcom is laudable, but in fact if an AD incumbent is doing a good job, there are generally very few credible & willing alternatives for the job so it doesn't take many cycles to sort out the situation. So I don't think this proposal would reduce the nomcom's workload. Rich _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf