Rob,
ps: all the questions as to what qualifications are required of a noomcom
volunteer, how big the pool should be, ... are all fine topics to discuss -
in a WG created to discuss those issues - none are relevant now - that you'd
even consider making an argument on those lines means that you're accepting
that the IESG "statement" is in fact a change - you support it because you
think it is a good change, while at the same time opposing any other change
(that you like less) as requiring a WG process. That's unacceptable.
I think you scope a working group charter based on the conversations
like these that occur. I disagree with the IESG's statement, and I
don't see even a rough consensus from my own view, but I do accept that
they have the authority to make such a statement, if rough consensus
could have been shown.
Eliot
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf