Hi Brian, Thanks for sharing your concern. My concern or rather, maybe slightly pessimistic, expectation is that just rerunning the previous process immediately right now might not make it easier to pick a second chair or may even lead, in the worse case, to the same result again of not being able to select a second chair. My understanding of the decision made by the previous members of the IAB is that the main intention was to get things set up to the point where the actual work and discussion can start - meaning creating a program and having at least one person that manages it. Therefore I’m hoping that we can take at least a little more time to figure out the right process and timing without impacting the work negatively. Mirja > On 31. Mar 2020, at 22:26, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Mirja, > > Thanks. I am a bit concerned that you say "months" not "weeks". > > Regards > Brian > > On 31-Mar-20 10:50, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote: >> Hi Brian, hi Rich, >> >> Thanks for your feedback. The IAB is planning to consider the appointment of a second chair in the coming months. At the moment we see it as most important to have a venue to develop proposals for discussion, and the IAB liaisons will logically support Elliot, if and whenever needed, to get the work started as soon as possible. >> >> Best, >> Mirja >> >> >> >> On 28.03.20, 02:21, "ietf on behalf of Salz, Rich" <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx on behalf of rsalz=40akamai.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> It was however explicit in the preceding discussions *and* in the IAB's call for nominations: >> >>> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/RSM0PyZ0CERQswyZ3CakuH8BT0k/ >> >> Yeah, seems like something (someone?) slipped through the cracks here. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >
