>> There may be a reason from the IAOC's point of view to require the ISOC president in the >> ISOC slot, but then again there may not - I'd like to hear from them on this point. > > Well, I don't think that it's really the IAOC's call. (Background for others - the IAOC has ISOC CEO as an ex officio member in the board, but ISOC also names one of the other members.) I wanted to provide my opinion. For what it is worth, while the CEO hopefully does not spent a huge amount of time with various IAOC detail issues, I have found the presence of the CEO extremely helpful on a number of occasions. There are some big topics where it has been very important for her (or them) to be in the team. IETF and ISOC are bound together from the administrative and financial perspective, and there are some topics where the leadership just has to be involved. Now, I am not saying that the ex officio slot has to be filled by the CEO. And different CEOs might have different skill sets and focus areas, and there are other arrangements with respect to the role in the IAOC. Other people, for instance, the CTO, could and have filled in many situations. But what I am saying is that there are some topics where there CEO pretty much has to be involved, either as part of the team or otherwise, because they are core questions not just to us but also for ISOC in their role. How is financing of the IETF going to evolve in the future? What ISOC share of IETF’s budget is feasible? Are you going to back us up if X happens? How do we approach a large sponsorship discussion? These are all questions that we have to deal with. Jari
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail