Leslie, On Feb 3, 2016, at 1:42 PM, Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As this impacts more than just the IAB, it seems to me that this is incomplete without a (consensual) consideration of what the IAOC needs from the IAB representation. This seems pretty important to me. I'm getting the sense that "IAB chair" as the ex officio IAB appointee is actually a sort of shorthand or placeholder for some requirements that weren't spelled out because it was assumed they were included in the chair role. People have started to review those elsewhere in the thread. > This job is more than a liaison role, so some consideration of actual skillset and ability to represent the IAB view, act on behalf of the IAB when appropriate, and carry matters back to the IAB for timely and appropriate review seem kind of key factors. Also, if it’s not an ex officio position, it would seem reasonable to outline a mechanism whereby the IAOC could indicate to the IAB that things were not working/a replacement was needed. At the same time, lack of churn is useful to the IAOC’s internal functioning, so some level of term commitment would be useful, ISTM. This is also quite helpful. It seems likely to me that the IAB representative role is somewhat different to an IAB-appointed person to function in the same capacity as all other IAOC members, for reasons having to do with the IAB oversight role, but it would be helpful to have those details of the function spelled out rather than incorporated indirectly by specifying "IAB chair." > If, on the other hand, that seems like too much work, then perhaps the “IAB Chair has too many things to do” is a fig leaf to cover some IAB internal politicking, which would be a shame. There’s plenty of work that needs doing. My support for this proposal is because I want to be sure the IAB is meeting its chartered responsibilities to the community as effectively as possible, where the community we're supposed to serve includes (is of course not limited to) the IETF, each other and an effective IAB. In other words, I think there's benefit here for everyone-- the IAB has more flexibility in managing its responsibilities, the IAOC can accept the IAB member most able to take on the "liaison+" role you described even if it's someone who's unavailable to be IAB chair, and none of us is barred from placing the IAB chair in the role if that's actually the best case. I particularly don't think it's entirely for the benefit of the IAB chair, present or future. thanks, Suzanne