On 03/26/2015 01:38 PM, Black, David wrote:
Hi Spencer,
I usually leave “silly rabbit ...” lines to the ADs - they’re better
at that than I am ;-).
Currently, with the exception of the IETF Chair, ADs are selected with
a strong focus on specific expertise in an Area. I was suggesting
adding a few “At-Large” ADs who would be selected with a strong focus
on generalist skills, and I think I saw other comments in favor of
adding generalists to the IESG during discussion of the initial area
merge proposal.
The At-Large ADs could serve as out-of-area ADs to spread the WG
management load. In addition, the existence of At-Large AD positions
could help the NomCom; if for some Area, the preferable slate of new
AD candidates and continuing ADs is missing an important chunk of
expertise, perhaps one of the good At-Large AD candidates would have
that expertise.
Generalist ADs could also be valuable in helping IESG manage tussles
between areas, since a generalist AD would be more likely to see such
tussles and take steps to resolve them, than an IESG that's buried deep
in a particular area or layer of the protocol stack.
Keith