Hi Ted,
I would also argue that ideas about how to significantly rearrange the
workload are things shouldn't be happening as part of the nomcom
process, but part of an open discussion so that all stakeholders have
a chance to comment. Those ideas should be applicable regardless of
who the candidate might be for a particular position, right?
Well, let's be a little nuanced about this. First, John did state and
highlight, "within the bounds established by existing documented
procedures". But beyond that, there is lot that can be done within
those bounds. In particular, how WGs themselves are organized can play
a role. Do you have 0, 1, or many WGs on a particular topic? Take for
example DHC. You could have a WG per DHCP option, a WG for DHCPv6,
etc. But this would be an inefficient use of resources, and successive
ADs have seen great wisdom in the organization of the longest running
WG. Would we could organize more work along these lines, I wonder if it
would make life easier for others, and perhaps ADs would like to take a
swing at this one publicly, but I see nothing wrong with such a question
being asked during NOMCOM. They go right to one's ability to manage,
which it seems to me is a good portion of the job.
Eliot
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf