Re: Poll: Restructuring questions

On 24 sep 2004, at 11.20, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> So please - take a look, and tell us that you're listening.
>
> <http://tools.ietf.org/poll/admin_scenario_alternatives/>
>
>

I think the poll was a good idea, I hope lots of people take it.  I 
know I had been reading and generally agreeing with some of the folks 
and the poll is a good forcing function for response.

Since my comments are slightly longer then short:

I agree with those who are arguing for Scenario 0 and agree with most 
of the arguments, about complexity and timing.  I also believe that a 
version of C remains a possibility in the future should scenario 0 not 
work.  Though I think it could.

I also agree with those who argue that we need an accurate job 
description for the IAD, and need it soon.  I think the startup process 
seems reasonable.  the timing is challenging, but I believe it could be 
done with lots of hard work and lots of good will.

I also agree that 2 IAOC members should be selected by Nomcom - I have 
argued before why I consider then qualified to chose.  I would have 
argued for more, since I believe that 1/2 of the IAOC should be nomcom 
selected.  However, since I agree with those who argue that the IETF 
chair and the IAB chair should be voting members of the IAOC,  that 
would mean that 4 of the participants were chosen by a Nomcom process, 
and that seems a good enough balance.

a.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf