Re: Updating BCP 10 -- some minor bits

Eric Burger <eburger@cs.georgetown.edu> Sat, 10 January 2015 23:16 UTC

Return-Path: <mep27rym@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 C91871A03A3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:16:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=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 KPwjnFkqAPfR for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:16:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x235.google.com (mail-oi0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF53F1A0076 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:16:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oi0-f53.google.com with SMTP id g201so16415679oib.12 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:16:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references:to; bh=ozT87P8PcCjfWflNJLXUFKzZ2SWisswdzmt2IVsQziI=; b=zyZHgUnKzXRMnIZx/Q4d5mWjY8esBplj7LahUYPyJLXrqNDfGH3TnDVY6hA93gADR7 aDf3vAAfWJ90rem1LZeuGkmQYdsqqz76PxbEVIQFd0uGULxnbnMgDo1oaUF+VVcK9YR+ 4oMotRZrv/4E3tzyAXQsvdGlxSuPpo+2A6IBlO34ZpIzzXkftJZklwic7/2hC8B22fCV H8b+MXfxjvTNkvt3ZgDfzwweZgH+eJT2GKhecCdXOT6FmIs41eRPdQnSbL78jBzjxsr8 AalQuq/1j/b8LpB0dW8S2GcuxjMxTEEChEq8UjZSzkhizNA1NMXvpf7sdk3PPWpV5cE+ jTTQ==
X-Received: by 10.60.52.132 with SMTP id t4mr13477067oeo.11.1420931785127; Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:16:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.15.124] (ip68-100-74-115.dc.dc.cox.net. [68.100.74.115]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ym2sm6562298obc.29.2015.01.10.15.16.23 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 10 Jan 2015 15:16:24 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Eric Burger <mep27rym@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_08D74FFC-757E-4895-9E8C-2E335A3FA1F5"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
Subject: Re: Updating BCP 10 -- some minor bits
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5b4
From: Eric Burger <eburger@cs.georgetown.edu>
In-Reply-To: <CAP8yD=upTKNPcKybr0ZTFDDUdT2s80hwYePojCsE49k6ktRHGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 18:16:24 -0500
Message-Id: <F0DC6D90-8D0A-4858-969E-E6159BE20DFE@cs.georgetown.edu>
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <3764.1420828464@sandelman.ca> <20150109184911.700261A8AB8@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAP8yD=upTKNPcKybr0ZTFDDUdT2s80hwYePojCsE49k6ktRHGQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/iLRB37K-C98lAjv0cb0Mqpvmt-Q>
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: <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: Sat, 10 Jan 2015 23:16:29 -0000

Let us be realistic. If someone was just on nomcom and they WANT to serve two consecutive terms and be chair, they must not be mentally balanced. No offense to those in the past who did that by choice.

> On Jan 9, 2015, at 2:05 PM, Allison Mankin <allison.mankin@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Mike,
> 
> I don't agree with constraining Chairs to past Nomcom voting members.  I think that our voting members have great abilities and insights, but I'd like for the ISOC CEO to have a bigger pool of possible choices, because organizing and executing all the steps of the Nomcom process is extremely demanding and many people either don't feel they could do it, or can't get management support for giving so much time and effort.
> 
> A future chair can make up the numbers as an observer in interviews.  I'm sure the past chair sometimes feels a bit disengaged too, after having had so much work to do, but this isn't a show-stopper.
> 
> Allison
> 
> 
> 
> On 9 January 2015 at 13:49, Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net <mailto:mstjohns@comcast.net>> wrote:
> At 01:34 PM 1/9/2015, Michael Richardson wrote:
> >2) several of us suggest that the Chair for year X, be appointed prior to the
> >   the beginning of the Third IETF of year X-1.  This permits the
> >   chair-elect/future-chair, to participate and learn about the process prior
> >   to starting.  While this adds about 4 months to the duration of the chair
> >   duties, it probably reduces their stress sufficiently that they will live
> >   an extra year longer.
> 
> It used to be usual that  the Chair for year X was a member of Nomcom X-1.  Doing a quick review I see that there are a number of recent (last 10 or so) years where that isn't the case.
> 
> It may be time to try and add that back into the chair selection criteria with increased emphasis.
> 
> It may also be time to add "MUST have been a nomcom member in the last 4 years" to that selection criteria.
> 
> I wouldn't do the overlap - the role of the "future chair" would need to be that of a mute fly on the wall to keep from perturbing the process.  Kind of boring IMHO.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
>