draft-klensin-nomcom-term-02 (was: [was: draft-rsalz-termlimits] and draft-leiba-term-limit-guidance-00

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Fri, 22 October 2021 16:54 UTC

Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF5DD3A1172; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:54:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B0Tk4o3N-i98; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:54:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 320CF3A1179; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 09:54:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1mdxoQ-000CUU-M3; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 12:54:34 -0400
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 12:54:28 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org
Subject: draft-klensin-nomcom-term-02 (was: [was: draft-rsalz-termlimits] and draft-leiba-term-limit-guidance-00
Message-ID: <4B6D22A2C61695F81D4DDB37@PSB>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-CDFXRm8BoxH9UfM4uJ0VWhuHhE>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 16:54:45 -0000

Hi.

I mentioned this ancient proposal in the context of Rich's
request for a GENDISPATCH slot.  In the interest of having a
contemporary document out there, I just posted a semi-current
version.  Having not been able to reach/ get a response from
Spencer, I'm posting it as sole author but I hope that is
temporary.

I find much to like in Rich's draft but, like Barry (and what
feels to me like the general discussion) dislike rigid limits.
This draft does not impose those limits but takes a slightly
different view of them than Barry's draft, making an explicit
change to how the Nomcom process handles incumbents.  That
change would probably reduce load on the Nomcom somewhat.  It
would largely eliminate the possibility of someone running
against an incumbent who is seen as having done well simply for
practice (I don't know how many people think that is important).
In retrospect, I don't really know whether that procedure should
be applied to all incumbents or only ones seeking a second term
or a second or third one.

If the community is not interested an making that sort of
change, Barry's draft is probably the foundation on which to
build.

Please note that this I-D is a slightly rewarmed version of a
2005-2006 proposal that was written partially as a think piece
rather than a complete and formal proposal.  That shows and I
have deliberately not invested much time in fixing/ modernizing
it.  If the community is interested in the change to the
procedures it implies, an update including something of a merge
among it and some of the idea and text in Barry's and Rich's
drafts would be helpful.  If not, it isn't worth much (or any)
more effort.

best,
     john