Andrew, You can consider this a question, an observation, or both as seems appropriate and, on that basis, figure out if it worth plenary time. >From my memory of the original IASA discussions, the role of the IAOC is not just administrative oversight. There is also a strategic role, one for which the IESG (and the IETF Chair in particular) may not have the right skills. Certainly, we've seen little evidence that Nomcoms have considered such skills as primary in picking IETF Chairs. Given all of the other responsibilities that have accrued to th IETF Chair role, and IESG roles more generally, it is not at all clear that they should consider the financial/administrative skills primary or that doing so would even be feasible given the randomly-selected skill and experience mix on the Nomcom (some of the same issues may apply to selection of Board members for the LLC, but I think those issues reinforce each other). In addition, while we have never had a completely out-of-control IETF Chair and I hope we never will, the nature of the Nomcom process, occasional historical difficulties in finding qualified candidates with adequate support commitments, and perhaps some analogies to other events in the world, suggest that paying careful attention to what are known in some quarters as checks and balances are important, especially in administrative matters and especially if we don't want to evolve further in the direction of decision-making by appeal (and, if it actually was feasible, recall). I'd encourage the IAOC to think about those contingencies and advise the community about what should be done (if anything). best, john --On Monday, July 16, 2018 09:53 -0400 Andrew Sullivan <ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Attached, please find the report from the IAOC at IETF 102. > We hope this is useful to you in formulating any questions you > might have for us this week. If you will have questions for > us that you'd like us to answer during the plenary, you can > also send them to us in advance at iaoc@xxxxxxxx. If you do >...
