Mike, On Sep 22, 2011, at 2:01 AM, Michael StJohns wrote: > I've been watching this with interest. I'm especially in agreement with Leslie's comments about chair load. > > Because of the legal issues with respect to the IETF trust and the implementing documents for the IAOC, its going to be pretty difficult to come up with a way to remove some of the responsibilities from the Chairs (meeting attendance, voting, etc) without also removing the authority. > > We're arguing somewhat in circles. > > I agree with Bob's comments below that the leadership of the IESG and the IAB need to be involved in the operation of the IAOC, but I no longer think there are enough hours in the day for the IETF and IAB chairs to be able to do everything they need to do. > > I hesitate to suggest this, but its probably time: > > Let's add a position to the IESG - Executive Vice-Chair or Co-Adjutor Chair. Basically, either the chair's personal representative (Executive Vice-Chair) or their replacement in waiting (Co-Adjutor Chair). > > Have the IAB select a vice-chair when they select the chair. > > Modify the various documents to describe the various responsibilities for the Vice-chairs - suggestions for the IETF co-chair would be to stick him/her with the IAOC, the Trust and at least half of the Administrivia.. For the IAB - ditto plus liaison and appeals. > > Modify the IAOC documents to permit either of the two co-chairs to be designated for a year at a time as IAOC members by the respective chairs choice (but can't be pulled off once on). No modificiations to the Trust legal document, but probably modify the administrative document to require the chair and co-chair for the IAB and IETF be invited to all non-closed meetings. > > Job description to the Nomcom - for the IETF, the co-chair is a chair-in-training with the expectation they may make a decent Chair when and if the time comes. Maybe rotate that job every two years regardless to ensure a couple of people with some of the chair experience are in the pool. Maybe even every year. I think something like you propose would be better than what the current draft proposes. I think the three chair positions we are discussing are different and need different solutions. For example: ISOC CEO/President This responsibility can't be delegated to just anyone. It needs to be an officer of ISOC. For example the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or Chief Operating Officer (COO). It's very different from the board selecting another IAOC member, there needs to be someone from ISOC who has fiduciary responsibility in ISOC. While I don't think having the CFO or COO would be good as having CEO, it would be workable. IAB Chair The IAB chair is selected by the IAB, it's not an nomcom selected position. As you propose, if the IAB created another leadership position, maybe analogous to an IAB COO that could work. It would have to be a leadership position in the IAB with real responsibility, including being a voting member of the IAOC and IETF Trust. If the IAB doesn't want to do this, then the IAB should consider ways of reducing it's load. It has taken on more responsibility in recent years. I think some of that could be moved out of the IAB. For example, the IAB could more fully delegate decision making to the RSOC and only deal with appeals. IETF Chair The IETF chair is chosen by the nomcom. The job requirements are clear in advance. Anyone applying is aware of the job. I don't think the IETF Chair position on the IAOC and IETF Trust can be delegated to anyone else without serious risk to the overall IETF standards operation. The IETF chair needs to be a voting IAOC and IETF Trust member. Too much of the IETF operation for it's successful operation is tied to the IETF chair for he/she to delegate it to anyone else. It's just part of the job. I think we should look for other ways to reduce the load on IETF chair, like giving up the general area (have a separate AD for that), or a more comprehensive change to the IESG where more of the decisions are moved to individual areas (e.g., add an other level to the IESG). The IESG is getting large for a flat management structure. Bob > > Mike > > > > At 10:27 AM 9/21/2011, Bob Hinden wrote: >>>> I think it's very important for the I* chairs to share the responsibility for IAOC decisions by being voting members. >>> >>> Why? >> >> >> So we don't have the IESG and IAB having disputes with the IAOC. Having the IETF and IAB chairs share the decisions avoids a lot of this. I think you are aware of a few times where we got close to this and I think the current structure helped avoid it. > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf