IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: I-D Action: draft-rsalz-termlimits-00.txt

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Thu, 28 October 2021 14:02 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.com>
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 C20553A10D0 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
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 dF6GrdFPxO9K for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1AE483A10C3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:02:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19SDaDTK000792; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 15:02:00 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=eznY8kxWeRdXnIdVjRIAFW+FA1dN8ONzNHyIunEF/wo=; b=IbWe76PBFnAPTcysD6b+b46SdQawt58Pi4K8Em7PNhpKesGqQ5JUTsESFWzCIdDQOPCG f208FFYv0uLqXaU1IOlkdM89lWP/YXM3JiNFDIDrZTDa93rqNa+EJM9/oa+IhDSfib1+ Gf5VYC1s/dPmtXz8Gn0JNGtITcFynBp34sVhcJCDSqzfcqBshnk1dw9SLZszf8wVm6z8 qoEP3v+OI2CiqreA9QNM85oHWs0dfgjgghtqwtvV2OUTzVUTGNNCpVZs+u4isyPvnMFy hvSHIXZRhzz6HHwHfOSuVHhF0uZiMV65a7K5ZpzVW4djM7F+uV13Tbi4KTpnhPPG5ybX FA==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 3byj0pxx7f-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 15:01:59 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 19SDpAng031804; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:01:58 -0700
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.57]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 3bx5fu50rb-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 28 Oct 2021 07:01:58 -0700
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) by usma1ex-dag3mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.54) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.24; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:01:57 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) by usma1ex-dag1mb5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.24; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:01:57 -0400
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.024; Thu, 28 Oct 2021 10:01:57 -0400
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: "Deen, Glenn (NBCUniversal)" <Glenn.Deen@nbcuni.com>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: I-D Action: draft-rsalz-termlimits-00.txt
Thread-Topic: I-D Action: draft-rsalz-termlimits-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHXyq7+F3Lq8ISqMkKyvU2xKhPZ0Kvoc1+A
Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:01:57 +0000
Message-ID: <9944D804-AC62-4771-B93D-A0BF86CD895E@akamai.com>
References: <DC8AB80C-5301-46B2-B609-2FDF9505A05C@nbcuni.com>
In-Reply-To: <DC8AB80C-5301-46B2-B609-2FDF9505A05C@nbcuni.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.54.21101001
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.27.164.43]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_9944D804AC624771B93DA0BF86CD895Eakamaicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-10-28_01:2021-10-26, 2021-10-28 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=580 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2110280077
X-Proofpoint-GUID: dFboP9YBD-FDOrRZOhpNcFRhOPT0IGM9
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: dFboP9YBD-FDOrRZOhpNcFRhOPT0IGM9
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.182.1,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.0.607.475 definitions=2021-10-28_01,2021-10-26_01,2020-04-07_01
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=516 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1011 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2110280078
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bZtbT1v16Cvv5HcdCYPygvK7NEU>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 14:02:07 -0000

  *   On the IESG->IAB path, I’ll offer the observation that it has been such a common migration path that many in the community may actually have come to believe that it’s how one qualifies for the IAB, as if the IAB were in effect the IESG Emeritus.    I know that is not the case but that doesn’t mean people don’t perceive it that way.


  *   It’s not unlikely that we’ve lost many good prospective IAB candidates to self-pruning because they have observed the IESG->IAB flow and believe that it’s a requirement and they don’t meet it since they haven’t been an AD.

I strongly agree with this.

v2.29.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status