Re: Updating BCP 10 -- some minor bits

Michael StJohns <> Fri, 09 January 2015 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B715D1A87E4 for <>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 10:49:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.513
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.513 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, MISSING_MID=0.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dzlvHNQSk45g for <>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 10:49:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09CE11A8AB8 for <>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 10:49:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([]) by with comcast id duoZ1p00C2Fh1PH01up4kv; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:49:04 +0000
Received: from ([]) by with comcast id dup31p00E3Em2Kp01up38W; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:49:04 +0000
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 13:49:23 -0500
To: Michael Richardson <>,ietf <>
From: Michael StJohns <>
Subject: Re: Updating BCP 10 -- some minor bits
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=q20140121; t=1420829344; bh=jI0jH7f4GpnMw0S7Vy3spc1VF1KPjAfKmWKRVHAV/5Y=; h=Received:Received:Date:To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=rOza5g0vaYwICvp4BO1pvO+DMBJOTlSpFqFq2Bgz2wvTtrRsJYaLnY4kJ1shkCpZ7 3JWlfQcxqFZDVdB+ZD2VyuuxVqmtzh3iE5QGQDlBO0HuHNIRLsGGbQcWG8hPI91ch7 T3PX3yQHXNnBCcIdk7L2jVORwhRRCs2z6C7ZCjy5GcQK3nLl3krnAImMQ34aoQunA1 2yXRNiFgslN6Ni+dRb7bzn7GRod+rpsnUZgBrA2Peqh60EcenC6tCz8Vzb4Ww13WF7 whRAYHiDVdkqtDx3byJ+pGKSCirK4onx0mBQSjxWON8aMU3oJ3YFkY5hFPCxSRMJsS xdmicyyuKbwwg==
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 18:49:07 -0000
Message-ID: <>

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.