Re: Appointment of a Transport Area Director

Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org> Thu, 07 March 2013 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mrw@lilacglade.org>
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 5758C21F87D7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 06:21:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.268
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.268 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.669, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OmZbGMDfPjHJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 06:21:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com (mail.painless-security.com [23.30.188.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC56521F8651 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 06:21:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from new-host-2.home (pool-71-184-79-25.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [71.184.79.25]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 178AB20183; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 09:21:31 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: Appointment of a Transport Area Director
From: Margaret Wasserman <mrw@lilacglade.org>
In-Reply-To: <7B6FDB89-F360-45B6-8240-F2F9F81ABAA7@vigilsec.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 09:21:41 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9292FB65-9842-4C95-9284-15F1E9ECEE1D@lilacglade.org>
References: <21B86E13-B8DA-4119-BBB1-B5EE6D2B5C1D@ietf.org> <51330179.3040500@gmail.com> <919840EE-BEC8-4F82-8D3C-B116698A4262@gmx.net> <1D88E6E9-33DE-4C4D-89F4-B0B762155D6F@standardstrack.com> <D4D47BCFFE5A004F95D707546AC0D7E91F77BA46@SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <3CB8992B-212A-4776-95FE-71CA1E382FFF@standardstrack.com> <513376DB.7000200@dcrocker.net> <E22ACC99-B465-4769-8B59-BB98A7BA93DF@gmx.net> <79E77523-3D92-4CE9-8689-483D416794EF@standardstrack.com> <D4D47BCFFE5A004F95D707546AC0D7E91F780D2F@SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <071C6ED7-352C-4E74-A483-F5E7A3270FA5@gmail.com> <C726E531-57DC-4C42-9053-1394983126D6@vigilsec.com> <5134D5A0.4050209@gmail.com> <tsllia3m5lh.fsf@mit.edu> <5134F720.5010507@cisco.com> <tsl1ubvlywt.fsf@mit.edu> <CAHBDyN6AM-_b2HMrmmQQVuhxFc-_Rfpfg0=r38mkcJ4zqoJeTw@mail.gmail.com> <tslr4julxmh.fsf@mit.edu> <1C1C0842-BF6A-4A3F-A312-35CF0A994793@lilacglade.org> <BDCCFB12-1F2C-44BD-867A-92E5745F3D39@vigilsec.com> <CAP8yD=tnx0FjRNDro1jzWF_MzDQqRZtNGQU_W0Zzw xLBteTb pQ@mail.gmail.com> <7B6FDB89-F360-45B6-8240-F2F9F81ABAA7@vigilsec.com>
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:21:45 -0000

Hi Russ,

On Mar 5, 2013, at 11:18 AM, Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> wrote:
> The rest of your question ought to be discussed at the TSVAREA meeting in Orlando.

I have looked at the agenda of the TSV Area Open Meeting (on Wednesday from 9:00am to 11:30am), and it includes the following item:

"- Open Mic about "Area Expectations for the TSV ADs" -- 60 minutes
The questions we will ask the community:
  - what is the existing description we gave to NomCom.
  - does the community agree with it?
  - is it reasonable, or are we asking too much?"

By "description we gave to the NomCom" do you mean the IESG's list of desired criteria?  Is the NomCom also going to report on the criteria that they came up with, after considering the IESG's input and whatever input they received from the community?

I am a little bit confused about the purpose of this meeting.  Is it for the IESG to get feedback on their desired criteria, so that those criteria could potentially be updated for future years?  Or is it for the nomcom to get further information from the community in order to determine the actual criteria the nomcom will use (based on input from both the IESG and the community) to fill the open TSV AD position this year?

I would like to know the purpose of the meeting, because I believe it would be appropriate for me to participate in a discussion of the former topic, but not the latter.

Margaret