|
On 9/12/2019 3:47 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:
Hi Mike,
Hi -
It seems like a singularly bad idea to be doing this review
at this
time, given all the uncertainty with the RSE and the
upcoming RPC
contract re-let. I went looking for some mention of a term
for the ISE
in the various documents (RFC's 6635, 6548 and 4846) and
didn't see
anything that said more than the IAB appointed the ISE -
e.g. nothing
that would indicate this needs to be done *right now*.
If you review the announcement made in October of 2017,
you'll see this:
"The Internet Architecture Board is pleased to announce
the appointment of Adrian Farrel as Independent
Submission Editor (ISE).
This appointment is for a
two-year term, beginning on February 15th, 2018."
Since his term was going to end between IETF 106 and IETF
107, we are asking for input on a re-appointment. You'll
see that the IAB of the time did similar calls for comment
during Nevil's term(s).
I went and reviewed the various emails since Nevil's original
appointment, and what I realized was that his "term" was directly
related to his contract to perform the ISE work. He had some sort
of MOU starting 10 Feb 2010. The 2/6/12 announcement of his
reappointment has him with a 3 year contract term beginning around
15 Feb 2012. He got 2 extensions of 2 years and 1 year (the 2
year extension was granted nearly 4 months in advance), all with
end/start date of 14/15 Feb.
Adrian got the appointment on 18 Oct 2017 for a 15 Feb 2018
start, but AFAIK, he's not on contract for a specific term. (Feel
free to correct me on that - I can't actually find anything that
points one way or the other). While you're correct that the
appointment message said "2 year term", there's no actual
underlying document (e.g. contract or RFC) that requires such a
term.
It seems to me that selecting an arbitrary date for a review
might be a useful approach in normal times, but now - not so
much. I think that date has been overtaken by events, and the IAB
should - in consultation with Adrian of course - set a review date
and term expiration date a bit further in the future, either
changing that date now, or agreeing to defer setting a date until
the RSE discussion is a bit more settled.
I believe it is in no one's interest to have the RSE and ISE
positions both up for grabs at the same time. If there's some
underlying reason that can't be waived (e.g. contract), then let
the community know what your firm constraints are.
Mike
Can I suggest we defer this to after the RSE process has
made forward
progress - perhaps until say after the March meeting?
Unless of
course Adrian has asked to be replaced?
I'm happy to report that Adrian did not indicate a need
to step down. (That's why this is a call for comments, not
a call for candidates).
I take it your feedback to the IAB is that making a
change here is ill-timed. Thanks for that feedback. If you
have direct feedback on Adrian's work, we will be happy to
receive that as well, in the channels previously named.
Thanks,
Ted
Later, Mike
On 9/10/2019 3:18 PM, IAB Executive Administrative Manager
wrote:
> As part of its oversight responsibility for the
Independent Stream, the
> IAB is soliciting comments from the community on the
performance of the
> Independent Submissions Editor, Adrian Farrel. The IAB
is interested in
> comments on the last two years of operation of the
Independent Stream
> and Adrian's activities as ISE.
>
> Please send comments to iab-chair@xxxxxx. In addition,
please CC
> execd@xxxxxxx.
>
> The IAB would appreciate receiving comments by Tuesday,
2019-10-08.
>
> Best regards,
> Cindy Morgan
> IAB Executive Administrative Manager
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
|
