--On Monday, March 24, 2025 17:49 +0000 "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >... >> If this could be turned into one or more proposals, should it be >> routed to the procon list? Should a discussion about how to >> generate such proposals go to there? Somewhere else? > I don't think procon is the place for it as that list is closely > chartered to track process consolidation documents 2026 2418 and > Lars's Chair may delegate" draft. 8717 bis seems likely to go > there as well. But making changes to the AD structure or > responsibilities seems out of scope. Yes, but there are some interactions. In particular, Dean points out the level of commitment and organizational support required of ADs and the IETF Chair. Now, if we look at draft-eggert-ietf-chair-may-delegate-02, we find that, if the IETF Chair is incapacitated, the role passes to the IAB Chair and then to the LLC Chair. But both positions also have become burdensome and more or less require organizational commitment from that person's organization. It is easy to imagine such an organization saying "IAB Chair (or LLC Chair) ok, but IETF Chair, absolutely not". Equally important, although more specific to the details of that draft, because the IAB and LLC Board select their own chairs, it is easily possible for those bodies to select someone to lead them whom they consider appropriate for those roles but not for the IETF Chair one, even temporarily, someone the Nomcom might not evaluate that way. >From the Nomcom perspective, they might find selecting someone who is appropriate to take on an AD role different from selecting someone who might also be called upon to take on part of the IETF Chair role... and leaving that up to the IETF Chair and an internal-to-the-IESG negotiation is essentially a delegation of authority from the Nomcom to the IETF Chair, a delegation the Nomcom has no ability to make under today's rules, nor is the IESG able to make it for them. So I see the boundary as being somewhat less clear than you suggest. john
