Yoav Nir <ynir(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
>> As such, it would likely be best if the new RTG AD was a either 1 year
>> or 3 year term simply so that it's opposite the IETF Chair term.
>> However, any additional flipping around due to the new area would
>> change that anyway.
> I think the most “spirit of the law” approach is not that “half the
> IESG” gets evaluated, but that the term be two years, so that an AD
> gets evaluated in “half the years”.
> If RTG has three ADs long-term, then there will be years with two of
> them getting evaluated.
My personal preference, btw, is to put someone in place for 3 years.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF(_at_)sandelman(_dot_)ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature