Ben, I can't reply for Mike, of course, but see below... On 02-Aug-19 09:13, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > Hi Mike, > > On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 04:16:07PM -0400, Michael StJohns wrote: >> Hi Alissa - >> >> Pruned - other comments in line. > > Also pruning... > >> On 7/31/2019 2:34 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >>> >>> By contrast, Portia was not an employee of ISOC. She was a contractor to ISOC before the IETF LLC was created, and is now a contractor to the IETF LLC, under your definition of “contractor/consultant.” >> >> Given that Portia is acting or interim (I don't actually remember which >> at this point), I don't know that her contractor status matters all that >> much or means anything for the future RSE or even for the future IAD. >> >> What's a lot more interesting is what you (singular and I*) see as the >> target relationship for the to-be-hired permanent IAD - contract with >> LLC, employee of the LLC, contract with the IAD's employing >> organization, something else? > > As a potentially implicated party, do you see "I*" as just referring to > IETF LLC, or to the IESG, IAB, and potentially other bodies whose names > start with I? If the topic is how does the LLC pick its ED, that really is LLC business but they would be foolish to ignore the interests of the non-IETF parts of the community. So I'd assume that they'll depend on input from the IESG, representing the main customer, but also consult the IRTF Chair, and the RSE, and any other parties likely to deal regularly with the ED. But anyway, that process is well advanced (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/4Slrq_DKzETrxmtS0d_GFZGJ_9M). If the topic is as given in the subject field, that belongs on rfc-interest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Regards Brian
