[procon] Re: Adopting draft-eggert-ietf-chair-* for PROCON work

[Benson Muite <[e-mail]>]

"Leslie Daigle \(ThinkingCat\)"
<ldaigle=[e-mail]> writes:

> Hi
>
> At the PROCON WG meeting at IETF 126, there was a strong sense of the 
> room that the WG should adopt the following documents as WG document 
> starting points for addressing our charter deliverable on IETF chair 
> delegation:
>
>    - draft-eggert-ietf-chair-standin: Focuses on establishing an 
> emergency stand-in for the IETF Chair.

The draft clearly specifies the problem.  While I support adoption, it
would be better if a stand-in and a backup stand-in are specified long
before there is a problem, for example two ADs could be choosen each
year whenever the IESG is reconstituted.

>    - draft-eggert-ietf-chair-may-delegate: Explores which aspects of the 
> IETF Chair role can be delegated.

Again, while I support adoption, it would be good if there is clear
guidance on what can be delegated.  One of the aims of having the chair
be a part of the IAB is so that there is someone with an overall view of
core parts of the IETF.  It maybe better to create new positions that go
through an appointment and approval process, rather than just allow for
delegation.  Finding people willing to take on such tasks and go through
the nomcom process may also be challenging, but as the functions that
maybe delegated are important to the IETF, it would be good to have some
approval process for roles that are delegated.  As the roles are
voluntary and uncompensated by the IETF, but instead essentially
sponsored by the individuals or the institutions they work for, having
some expectation of weekly hours required would probably be helpful.

>
> We would be happy to hear more support, here on the mailing list, for 
> the adoption of these documents. If you are supportive, please say so on 
> the list. If you disagree with adopting them as the starting point of 
> the WG’s work, please share that.
>

Benson