On Dec 18, 2014 6:02 PM, "Michael StJohns" <mstjohns@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> At 05:47 PM 12/18/2014, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
>
>
>> NEW
>>
>> While it's true that recent IESGs have had two Area Directors in each Area except for the General Area, the number of Area Directors in each Area has varied since https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1396.txt (for reference, see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/past-members.html).Â
>>
>> This variation was due to a number of factors, including workload and personal preferences, and happened as a natural part of the IESG organizing itself to do the work the IESG is chartered to do.Â
>>
>> At one point, the IESG placed three Area Directors in a single Area (Scott Bradner, Deirdre Kostick, and Michael O'Dell, in the Operational & Management Requirements Area, between IETF 36 and IETF 37 in 1996).
>
>
> I don't think I have any real problems with the original language.
>
> The particular case that Scott cites though was due to the combining of two different areas - Operations (which had 2 ADs) and Network Management (which had 1). That happened midway through the cycle and not (AIRC) as part of the Nomcom placing three people as ADs for Ops and Management.
>
> So it was transitional, and reflected in the next Nomcom results which brought the O&M AD count down to two. Operationally, I don't think it affected which groups the ADs had had before the merge.
>
> Mike
Hi, Mike,
Right - that's what I think I'm pointing to - that there's not a natural law that says all areas are exactly two ADs wide, and things can move around, and IESGs can work out specifics with Nomcoms.
Thanks for the extra background - it's helpful.
Spencer