On Jul 18, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote: > Speaking only for myself, I'll say that it's quite easy to go to many IETF meetings, but never learn anything about IETF process. When someone has the responsibility for choosing the people who manage the process, we ought to focus on ensuring that level of knowledge. Hence the second pool. A general thought: Generally speaking, I think people fall into broad classes - those who have followed a mailing list, those who have followed a mailing list and shown up for meetings, those who have written an internet draft, those who have pushed one through to RFC, those who have chaired a working group, and those who have served in some capacity on the I*. There might be another class. But those general groups, in sequence, will have a monotonically increasing experience with the processes and with the performance of people that are in those groups - someone who has pushed an ID through a working group probably has a better educated view of the chair than someone who has simply sat in the audience, and so on. Not sure I want to be prescriptive about this, but the people I would expect to be targeting to get into a given role in leadership would be a person at the next lower rung - obvious working group chair candidates are people who are writing drafts and have some other characteristics, and obvious AD candidates might be working group chairs. People selecting them would be people of a comparable level of experience. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf