John - the problem, is that management doesn't want either of us to gain any traction on reform or process with real oversight, and actually for all my ssssssssssssssssssssssssscreaming into the wind all I really want is a process that actually is fair and open.
Again - I think the answer is a cafeteria style standardization process where the IETF nor IESG are responsible for the actual promotion of proposed standard to standard status ... Todd ----- Original Message ----- From: "John C Klensin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "todd glassey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Bill Fenner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <ietf@ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:16 AM Subject: Re: NOMCOM term limits... Re: Now there seems to be lack of communicaiton here... > > > --On Tuesday, September 05, 2006 6:11 AM -0700 todd glassey > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I originally said two...and would prefer that. > > > > What I am saying is that there should be a total of two or > > three instances as a NOMCOM candidate and that is a much > > different statement than figuring who is in office now and who > > is eligible...As to what it prevents-career Internet Standards > > jockey's. > > > > And since the purpose is to keep the IETF honest, I want the > > same term limits for any and all IETF positions, including the > > TRUST as well. > > > > By the way - has anyone seen a Business Plan for the TRUST and > > what it is supposed to do? I don't mean some fictional set of > > ideas - I mean the business plan. I want to see exactly what > > the Trust is responsible for and how its to be measured, > > Todd, > > Term limit ideas for IESG, IAB, and others, and even a > suggestion that no one should be able to serve on consecutive > Nomcoms, have been floated multiple times and have gone nowhere. > I believe the latest attempt was as part of > draft-klensin-nomcom-term-01.txt, which appears to be going > nowhere as well. > > If you have a proposal here, I recommend that you make it in the > form of an Internet Draft that is specific enough that people > can actually comment on, or respond to, it. And, since > proposals that have been fairly strongly motivated haven't even > progressed to a WG review or IETF Last Call, I recommend that > you justify your preferences in someone more detail than saying > "I want". In this area, there is clear evidence that no one > cares about what you want or, for that matter, what I want. > > Just my opinion. > john > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
