Selecting leadership for process issues

[Geoff Huston]

>
>>One issue I've been thinking about:
>>
>>what's an appropriate way to select the people to lead the effort to 
>>rethink the IETF?
>>
>>At the moment, I think we know the following:
>>
>>- We need someone who is not the current leadership to take charge of the 
>>process
>>- We need an open forum (most likely called a WG) to get input into the 
>>process and discussion among people
>>- We need some kind of work team to make sense of the input and do the 
>>heavy lifting on drafting the problem statements and (eventually) 
>>proposed solutions.
>>
>>But how should we get this structure into place, and who should man it?


There's no doubt that a Nomcom learns a lot about the current state of
the IETF while it exercises its role. It ends up with a good
appreciation of the way the IETF community perceive the well-being of
the IETF as a whole as well as being forced to be aware of every
glitch as well! They are in a good position to make a selection for
an individual whom they feel is competent to undertake the task
without being accused of putting up  a champion for any particular
group or view.

So on reflection I'm quite in favour of "let the Nomcom pick the
person", but equally I believe that this is no normal process and
no normal wg and some constant level of broader ownership of the process
through regular IETF plenary review and progress reporting is the best way we
can be assured that the outcomes will be constructive, relevant
and useful.


Geoff