RE: term for 3rd RTG AD

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Wed, 07 January 2015 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 1D0B41A006D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 09:35:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 zRYYISjABOeE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 09:35:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (asmtp5.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.176]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FC0C1A0086 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 09:35:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp5.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t07HZ77M032433; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:35:07 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (089144212023.atnat0021.highway.a1.net [89.144.212.23]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp5.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t07HZ4mj032362 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:35:05 GMT
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Murray S. Kucherawy'" <superuser@gmail.com>, "'Michael Richardson'" <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <5614C286-0CD2-4DAD-A846-510EE38D1B9A@ietf.org> <549DB615.90408@gmail.com> <20141226222726.GB27054@verdi> <24548.1419894559@sandelman.ca> <142A75F8-8C58-429B-8D1D-D5AE0B8195E2@gmail.com> <22484.1419958259@sandelman.ca> <CAL0qLwaM6D=c_WMj1n6K3zc6g5PUEqCBZFFs5eQ3gwhv76=TOQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwaM6D=c_WMj1n6K3zc6g5PUEqCBZFFs5eQ3gwhv76=TOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: RE: term for 3rd RTG AD
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 17:35:03 -0000
Message-ID: <069101d02aa0$46d2d2e0$d47878a0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0692_01D02AA0.46D543E0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQH4JNt/qlsA9M2xk+QqeY0MsJNXrQGkAPheAtZo8qIB+DBVHQJ/vWRrAeACPRQB/UFyI5v+eQog
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-21232.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--23.044-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--23.044-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 0+daXaNUWRVzgDEqoQagelT/YzREB9OKrTtVtsxU7BgSgmfkOsgfKgqQ QQLMh66nXEO4/de015gz9UJCvgJcSu/RuNZ8EH8akPoFsM336M5MbJ3oCLFF5JGX1h2mF996r9Y /9i+8T9Zoxn4upQ8Z7uR/Iq7Svb4Edcd1ash4cpQa4TdTJQcbVwadgcU3AmGk7nmmTvyn12nv/7 2zC4hJFZ3woJ2UeuYF6HMoliKXrehpZtsObgt0hne8jMDtfIiIIQXVF2qsdV213HaVceMXUiL8H aC6OsQfMHoR0KY0MZVVsQM/S7OiNfJMF6pylZNWVF7yOiu4q2kgVvZV3BB2QNE6Er5EVajmW2E6 A0VjBlqQ0Ir9EHtCMQJIccaMDcUCF/JN69C1+RCR1ykkpfknCvwGVtfL479acq4vxILn2XdgKjA pK+kj73lDN61qsyzESAXq66IdDvr1nyrqs74iHphyXgGCpXKTwx0jRRxcQfOPaLJ/Ca3ST2ji04 EzOjY4PDcFKiUcob7XoUgqgJGOVTWBtSWZ+bE6b/5HBZ6dvRh/r8x3wtvaXyejSyZ3UYtkAMf5J kUGtGokg8WaoMOWypJTzjwz+GzoSLzBQxkvS++L6bUMM+bbIv98fIf4wIXlFRlN8zTSzj5IuDex IJcYosl04VgvzG2G2VoX2mvb7IQAtbB4AgzbwTTR2TFg0xG31ViV5EWK7TubKItl61J/yZUdXE/ WGn0FSXhbxZVQ5H8AyZjSuX9202i8NtJy/DwqHJEP/ziL3x/f9cauv4AzD/Ukas/DlPuA
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/e4urE5x0hD2MdxwLdrLZKgkui7M
Cc: 'ietf' <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:35:15 -0000

Speaking as someone who will not be on the IESG if/when this happens.
 
- I don't understand a significant reason against 2 years (yes, it puts it in synch with the chair appointment, but so what?)
- I think 3 years is a long ask as Murray points out
- I do not know whether the need for the third AD will last three years
- I worry that 1 year would be too short especially if NomCom are not able to process in time for March
- I worry that the overhead of being nominated would make 1 year too small a reward
 
So, what was wrong with 2 years?
 
Adrian
 
From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: 07 January 2015 17:28
To: Michael Richardson
Cc: ietf
Subject: Re: term for 3rd RTG AD
 
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:

My personal preference, btw, is to put someone in place for 3 years.
 
 
I prefer a one year term, given that it seems a higher bar for employer support to ask for three years versus one for a potential first term.
-MSK