Re: term for 3rd RTG AD

[Allison Mankin <[e-mail]>]

Michael,

I support a two year term for the extra Routing AD - that's a good amount
of time for getting good at the AD job, whereas one year is too short, and
three is (as others said) a lot of commitment, as well as being a problem
if the person loses interest or some such issue.

Allison

On 29 December 2014 at 18:09, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>
wrote:

>
> John Leslie <[e-mail]> wrote:
>     >    (Nonetheless, I support the IESG choosing to experiment with three
>     > RTG ADs for one year.)
>
> I hadn't thought yet as to the term and rotation by which the 3 RTG ADs
> would
> get re-evaluated.  RFC3777 (and bis) say that the terms shall be such that
> "half the IESG" gets evaluated each year.
> (If the writeup explained that, I missed it)
>
> As such, it would likely be best if the new RTG AD was a either 1 year or 3
> year term simply so that it's opposite the IETF Chair term.  However, any
> additional flipping around due to the new area would change that anyway.
>
> --
> Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>, Sandelman Software Works
>  -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
>
>
>
>