Re: I-D Action: draft-hardie-iaoc-iab-update-00.txt

Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com> Sat, 06 February 2016 23:52 UTC

Return-Path: <suzworldwide@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C221A879F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 15:52:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Kird0Gs-7Oxq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 15:52:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x22f.google.com (mail-qg0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3C161A8794 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Feb 2016 15:52:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id b35so94559695qge.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 15:52:43 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=kZupSfNYG/nfbPsBTdkjYApAl8bD5crC5Oe/++UNwCs=; b=q7cd7Xqvj9RuX+GIKgLfSMLkBGvuqynV+kpuQn/S68D5lhaoJJUj8l7UHuezOxoPiU vyW4tL12lo+8ndtadWZqVmso53XQW9ZDrnkIPBh7U7VNhB900raxVKH0SJsaQ4AOaXIU Yg5Qvyab5IVpbLPvkGcRdlMxHX5Th7ZAz5hTQM/jPunwf/AGyk+5SnRT+eLmen1kkRHs pTb7f3NtVjc6UQ5NY1rMCHMrtJyZ8Cprtuoqw8ZOm2rn8kbI1u/Ugl6+h/68Cyk3RMK0 TFosFUpCw2TSi42/ELZ+V4my0creD4UWOVW9wwpfXlM5fN30hesBTq8uMh6NTVlY8L5C 9pJg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=kZupSfNYG/nfbPsBTdkjYApAl8bD5crC5Oe/++UNwCs=; b=RS5DgqCL6Pa7UTj1JzGyGhD0VjEJoKUg0fb6Mekzt7YPo1qSqur8SGW7rt+RHPMXeH v3+lUHdM2D5/E2OF6u/sEhDCutwQBWTDY6kJWLDXJxe3R6WWbC1ga0OQ+HkSwf22tCKG UMZvfAWCQX0m2Mts7Eqx3v5Qe87rhYllTTaHd1iTEvXA0XR0W0dXWkCcCIYMaewcH/QN /uIoW6qVmamLZbSfZees+ruc65qyxAnVxyXUmm6AtrRrkL4OJ/Bq5IuwLbsbmTUZ5Sjx 0ojvJgHA1Rq3k9yLCdWBKWKyk/EWZYtGIshPiXaKSqXSwc7C2s4OjMF9eCP2qI4vJQtR +ISQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSEkIix8B1nA5yM58adLD7whBjCU/yIHBBfogi+ZlnEwD9sC9huloJWWLyzxZyGzw==
X-Received: by 10.140.82.11 with SMTP id g11mr26284837qgd.77.1454802762906; Sat, 06 Feb 2016 15:52:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:181:c002:25ee:7cab:9ce6:b5c4:8145? ([2601:181:c002:25ee:7cab:9ce6:b5c4:8145]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id s90sm10970462qgs.13.2016.02.06.15.52.40 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 06 Feb 2016 15:52:41 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-hardie-iaoc-iab-update-00.txt
From: Suzanne Woolf <suzworldwide@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <1FD816AB-1721-4A6B-A1E7-6357B94FCA76@thinkingcat.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 18:52:39 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <38A215DA-15EE-4204-8C69-E9DDF02D2038@gmail.com>
References: <20160202182036.26498.27650.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <56B10131.7040603@gmail.com> <1FD816AB-1721-4A6B-A1E7-6357B94FCA76@thinkingcat.com>
To: Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KbXMYNSm5OIL_-debiVKdPJ7yrM>
Cc: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 23:52:46 -0000

Leslie,

On Feb 3, 2016, at 1:42 PM, Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> wrote:

> 
> As this impacts more than just the IAB, it seems to me that this is incomplete without a (consensual) consideration of what the IAOC needs from the IAB representation.

This seems pretty important to me. I'm getting the sense that "IAB chair" as the ex officio IAB appointee is actually a sort of shorthand or placeholder for some requirements that weren't spelled out because it was assumed they were included in the chair role. 

People have started to review those elsewhere in the thread.

> This job is more than a liaison role, so some consideration of actual skillset and ability to represent the IAB view, act on behalf of the IAB when appropriate,  and carry matters back to the IAB for timely and appropriate review seem kind of key factors.  Also, if it’s not an ex officio position, it would seem reasonable to outline a mechanism whereby the IAOC could indicate to the IAB that things were not working/a replacement was needed.  At the same time, lack of churn is useful to the IAOC’s internal functioning, so some level of term commitment would be useful, ISTM.

This is also quite helpful. It seems likely to me that the IAB representative role is somewhat different to an IAB-appointed person to function in the same capacity as all other IAOC members, for reasons having to do with the IAB oversight role, but it would be helpful to have those details of the function spelled out rather than incorporated indirectly by specifying "IAB chair."

> If, on the other hand, that seems like too much work, then perhaps the “IAB Chair has too many things to do” is a fig leaf to cover some IAB internal politicking, which would be a shame.  There’s plenty of work that needs doing.

My support for this proposal is because I want to be sure the IAB is meeting its chartered responsibilities to the community as effectively as possible, where the community we're supposed to serve includes (is of course not limited to) the IETF, each other and an effective IAB. 

In other words, I think there's benefit here for everyone-- the IAB has more flexibility in managing its responsibilities, the IAOC can accept the IAB member most able to take on the "liaison+" role you described even if it's someone who's unavailable to be IAB chair, and none of us is barred from placing the IAB chair in the role if that's actually the best case.

I particularly don't think it's entirely for the benefit of the IAB chair, present or future.


thanks,
Suzanne