--On 13. november 2004 16:31 -0500 Michael Richardson
<mcr(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ottawa(_dot_)on(_dot_)ca> wrote:
If the IAB chair and IETF chair (who is also the IESG chair) are
both members IASA (whether voting or not), I am wondering about the
people appointed by the IESG and IAB.
Why do it this way? Why not just have nomcom fill all slots?
Section 3 could explain more there.
The logic that led to this was that today, IESG and IAB deal more closely
with the support functions (IAB's charter includes overseeing the technical
work of the RFC editor; the IESG is a major consumer of secretariat support
resources), and that they would have a greater insight in the requirements
for overseeing the IAD role than the average Nomcom volunteer.
The IETF and IAB chairs were added to give direct, continuous contact,
while the IESG & IAB appointed members (who would typically NOT be members
of IESG and IAB) were added to give the IESG and IAB the opportunity to
name members they thought well-qualified.
The argument for having Nomcom-selected members at all is (I think) that
having *all* the members selected via two levels of indirection from the
community (first nomcom then IESG + IAB) seems "not optimal".
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf