: Improving the IETF leadership selection
process
Hi Donald-
You present an interesting idea and I appreciate your desire to avoid a
two-class nomcom. If you were to take that approach, I'd suggest allocating
points as below:
High points (e.g., 10)
- served as a working group chair
- served
Just to add my two cents to this discussion from a (past) noncom chair
perpsective, having more experienced IETF participants on the Nomcom helps
tremendously. It makes it far easier for the noncom chair and non-voting
members (previous nomcom chair and liaisons) to stick to the roles as
On Jul 30, 2010, at 3:11 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
Just to add my two cents to this discussion from a (past) noncom
chair perpsective, having more experienced IETF participants on the
Nomcom helps tremendously. It makes it far easier for the noncom
chair and non-voting members (previous
On 7/30/2010 9:46 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I was discussing this with various people yesterday - maybe it would be useful
to have a moving average NOMCOM, with a two year term, and 50% replacement
each year. Once that was set up, I think that the need for experienced hands
would diminish -
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 03:46:12AM -0400, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
I was discussing this with various people yesterday - maybe it would be
useful to have a moving average NOMCOM, with a two year term, and 50%
replacement each year. Once that was set up, I think that the need for
experienced
I also think that a 50% replacement rule - or even a 66% replacement
rule would be very useful. The work load is very high, but much of
that is gathering knowledge and opinions on the different candidates.
Since the candidate set from year to year is not disjoint, I think
that the work load for
I do not think it is reasonable to ask people to commit for serving a
two year term on nomcom. Some folks have the energy and interest to do
so. Wonderful and thank you to them. But given that it is an intense
personnel selection process, I do not think expecting two years of
service for it
On 7/30/10 9:46 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Jul 30, 2010, at 3:11 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
Just to add my two cents to this discussion from a (past) noncom chair
perpsective, having more experienced IETF participants on the Nomcom helps
tremendously. It makes it far easier for the
Correct - I was not specifically referring to folks that previously had been
on Nomcom.
However, there are certainly folks that had previously served on Nomcom that
do volunteer again - last year's Nomcom had a voting member that had been on
3 or 4 other Nomcoms and several others that had been
At 06:15 AM 7/30/2010, Aaron Falk wrote:
On 7/30/10 9:46 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Jul 30, 2010, at 3:11 AM, Mary Barnes wrote:
Just to add my two cents to this discussion from a (past) noncom
chair perpsective, having more experienced IETF participants on the
Nomcom helps
I can see the desire to have some more experience on the nomcom.
However, I am completely opposed to invidious schemes to divide the nomcom
voting members into two (or more) classes. And I think the desired results
can be obtained without doing so.
The current qualification is attendance 3 out
Hi Donald-
You present an interesting idea and I appreciate your desire to avoid a
two-class nomcom. If you were to take that approach, I'd suggest allocating
points as below:
High points (e.g., 10)
- served as a working group chair
- served on the IESG or IAB
Medium points (e.g., 5)
-
Dave,
I have read your proposal. Here's some initial feedback. But I might
change my opinion upon further reflection :-) For background, I have
never participated in nomcom work, so my experience on that aspect is
limited.
My comments are structured around your specific recommendations:
-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jari
Arkko
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 2010 4:25 AM
To: dcroc...@bbiw.net
Cc: IETF Discussion
Subject: Re: Nomcom Enhancements: Improving the IETF leadership selection
process
Dave,
I have read your proposal. Here's some initial feedback. But I might change my
opinion
Ross Callon rcal...@juniper.net wrote:
In the past there have been cases where some specific IESG members have
been perceived by some members of the community as being a problem.
I would be amazed if it were otherwise; in fact I'd be surprised if
you could name a NomCom where no such case
Jari,
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. With luck, any revisions you make to them
won't render the following responses invalid...
On 7/24/2010 10:24 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:
RECOMMENDATION -- Selective Exclusion
I agree in principle that we need this -- for conflict of interest and for
Hi,
I'm only going to comment on the suggested changes to the BCP.
The other recommendations all seem to be reasonable additions to the
general guidance for future Nomcoms.
RECOMMENDATION -- Selective Exclusion
* The Nomcom Chair may selectively exclude any participant from a single
Enhancements: Improving the IETF leadership selection
process
Folks,
Nomcom has been an integral part of the IETF for nearly 20 years.
A number of us have been developing a set of recommendations designed to
adapt the Nomcom process to better match current realities of the IETF
community
Looking at the numbers, and trying to estimate (because there are not
clear records to make it easy to verify whether person X has ever been a
WG chair, what I found was that typically, about 40% of the pool was
experienced by the conditions we were using. Assuming 100 volunteers
(which has
On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 02:06:33PM -0700, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Speaking only for myself, I'll say that it's quite easy to go to many
IETF meetings, but never learn anything about IETF process. When someone
has the responsibility for choosing the people who manage the process, we
ought to
Andrew Sullivan wrote:
To begin with, I have doubts that people who really haven't learned
_anything_ about IETF process are going to be the ones who volunteer
for Nomcom.
I have no doubts about that. A NomCom position is often considered a
leadership position by one's sponsor or manager --
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:42:00AM -0400, Barry Leiba wrote:
I have no doubts about that. A NomCom position is often considered a
leadership position by one's sponsor or manager -- it is, after all,
an HR job. To get into other leadership positions in the IETF, one
has to build up
To: IETF Discussion ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 4:48 PM
Subject: Nomcom Enhancements: Improving the IETF leadership selection
process
Folks,
Nomcom has been an integral part of the IETF for nearly 20 years.
A number of us have been developing a set of recommendations designed
to the
candidates' competences, and to interviews advised by feedback from the
community.
Cheers,
Adrian
- Original Message -
From: Dave CROCKER d...@dcrocker.net
To: IETF Discussion ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Saturday, July 17, 2010 4:48 PM
Subject: Nomcom Enhancements: Improving the IETF
On 7/18/2010 8:27 AM, Yoav Nir wrote:
Of course, if they notice that a dozen people working for the same company
send in such opinions about Dave, they may choose to ignore all opinions from
that group.
You may be right. This is looking more investigative than the NomCom can be
expected to
On Jul 17, 2010, at 8:48 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Folks,
Nomcom has been an integral part of the IETF for nearly 20 years.
A number of us have been developing a set of recommendations designed to
adapt the Nomcom process to better match current realities of the IETF
community. The
Lixia,
On 7/18/2010 1:14 PM, Lixia Zhang wrote:
The comment: I support the idea of having a second 'expertise' pool of
volunteers, but I wonder where comes this suggestion of selecting *3* members
from this pool. A few random questions:
- Do we know what is this number for the last several
On Jul 18, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Speaking only for myself, I'll say that it's quite easy to go to many IETF
meetings, but never learn anything about IETF process. When someone has the
responsibility for choosing the people who manage the process, we ought to
focus on
On 7/18/2010 5:00 PM, Fred Baker wrote:
But those general groups, in sequence, will have a monotonically increasing
experience with the processes and with the performance of people that are in
those groups - someone who has pushed an ID through a working group probably
has a better educated
On Jul 18, 2010, at 2:06 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
Lixia,
On 7/18/2010 1:14 PM, Lixia Zhang wrote:
The comment: I support the idea of having a second 'expertise' pool of
volunteers, but I wonder where comes this suggestion of selecting *3* members
from this pool. A few random questions:
Folks,
Nomcom has been an integral part of the IETF for nearly 20 years.
A number of us have been developing a set of recommendations designed to adapt
the Nomcom process to better match current realities of the IETF community. The
draft has progressed far enough to call for public
On 2010-07-18 03:48, Dave CROCKER wrote:
...
At:
http://www.bbiw.net/recent.html#nomcom2010
there is a copy of the Full Proposal, and a Summary which primarily
contains just the recommendations.
Um, we have this new system called Internet-Drafts, whereby proposals
are issued by a
Brian, it wasn't ready. Are you trying to say something beyond asking why it
wasn't submitted as a draft? I don't understand the subtext.
Scott
___
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
On 7/17/2010 1:49 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
http://www.bbiw.net/recent.html#nomcom2010
...
Um, we have this new system called Internet-Drafts,
...
Brian,
There is? Good to know. I'll try to use it for the next version.[*]
And now that we've traded the requisite sarcasm...
As
34 matches
Mail list logo
