Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback

Keith Moore <> Tue, 05 November 2019 16:53 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D7BC1201C6 for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 08:53:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j6ez5dGkHpxX for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 08:53:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01F7E12022A for <>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 08:53:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal []) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DCD421A92; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:53:06 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 05 Nov 2019 11:53:06 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=il0aQO4MjRKPv0iAfE/vABPByilzesAQmPj3mjORZ UQ=; b=R4JxEuylDJQZRpQ9MUA4jHosJFiUl5q5Ox8e6J/+ti225bRGwxhve0XHe 6hJ6lWYNQvhkN+Jquony72o1gnrcJUqWY/IvGQKoL1BtxvumcFZkWKN1cgwGdrST 3Oi065v/ZEjmJM5g8RymnRnW5XuX3kaVytimMj2xElqq5AIwTf6Fk4c51ZVgbHlU 23zXimtHRhz3vsApxfnwod2JXiD1T4wnLiqPKXBweg5BxvsPuhAtIxcLlQgFA8UU 7OSTCd1S43PsNqxKBenfoE/fQxog6yW5tSE4fvZdhHEkE6QhhWO3uIx6ufQILjek KGLW5JKfyduZkF503vrkewTrcFj2g==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:8ajBXSfqaPeOOSRkKI8CyUAZeF6esbM-23IJwVu8QBF9H7LSSf7HsA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudduhedgleeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgfgsehtke ertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthif ohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucfkphepuddtkedrvddvuddrudektddrud ehnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghr vghtihgtshdrtghomhenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:8ajBXeJqGKJ71rHVNWCEgBjEU0NUbo17KdU5tUukV6EMvUaDlSWtrA> <xmx:8ajBXd6BSiiPN861p3ETWUENfiN7nR0PFgrQClQjCr7faeumcri-lg> <xmx:8ajBXdTlgDj-Cs1lORowur5fIpliGRqE27bNP-e6kL6FS6m_kI71OQ> <xmx:8qjBXXsV4wXNeD3moUKgDAGt8ezW3Ito1G76CYeXCwuUOGE9MGdANA>
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BC89680061; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:53:04 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Keith Moore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 11:53:02 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 16:53:13 -0000

On 11/5/19 10:52 AM, Bob Hinden wrote:

> I hope this helps makes it clear that more authority should go to the w.g. chairs, adding more AD won’t scale.   The NomCom needs to be selecting people who are not the best technical experts in an area, but who know enough to make sure that adequate review has been done in the working groups, verify directorate reviews, and that last call comments have been addressed.

One problem with that idea is that WGs too often work to the benefit of 
a narrow interest and to the detriment of other interests.   The IESG is 
the only formal mechanism we have to keep WGs from getting out of hand 
in that way.   So IMO the ADs need to have a high level of technical 
expertise, but broad technical expertise rather than narrow technical 

There's also a problem with relying on directorate reviews, which is 
that every reviewer approaches the situation from his or her own point 
of view, and sometimes reviewing a review is more work than reviewing 
the subject document.   Ideally an AD would have benefit of reviews from 
several reviewers across a spectrum of perspectives.