"Martin" == Martin Stiemerling
<martin(_dot_)stiemerling(_at_)neclab(_dot_)eu> writes:
Martin> Hi Margaret, I will answer as the agenda below is out of the
Martin> TSVAREA session.
Martin> On 03/07/2013 03:21 PM, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
>>
Hi Russ,
>>
>> On Mar 5, 2013, at 11:18 AM, Russ Housley
<housley(_at_)vigilsec(_dot_)com>
>> wrote:
>>> The rest of your question ought to be discussed at the TSVAREA
>>> meeting in Orlando.
>>
>> I have looked at the agenda of the TSV Area Open Meeting (on
>> Wednesday from 9:00am to 11:30am), and it includes the following
>> item:
>>
>> "- Open Mic about "Area Expectations for the TSV ADs" -- 60
>> minutes The questions we will ask the community: - what is the
>> existing description we gave to NomCom. - does the community
>> agree with it? - is it reasonable, or are we asking too much?"
>>
>> By "description we gave to the NomCom" do you mean the IESG's
>> list of desired criteria? Is the NomCom also going to report on
>> the criteria that they came up with, after considering the IESG's
>> input and whatever input they received from the community?
Martin> The IESG has sent these requirements [1] to the nomcom, as
Martin> stated on that site. That's what is meant with "what is the
Martin> existing description we gave to NomCom".
Hi, after reading your message I still don't understand the answer to
Margaret's question.
Also, I'd like to remind you that the IESg does not send requirements to
the nomcom. According to RFC 3777 the IESG sends a set of desired
expertise. The nomcom develops a set of required qualifications based
on these and community input.
It's not just a semantic point. I think over the years the IESG has
started to believe that the IESG rather the community sets the job
requirements for ADs. I'd like to ask IESG members especially to be
very careful about the terminology and to respect the process.