[rfc-i] Term for RSE

Marshall Eubanks tme at americafree.tv
Thu Nov 18 23:32:29 PST 2010

On Nov 18, 2010, at 7:45 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:

> One issue I discussed with Glenn in Beijing that I feel needs a bit
> more discussion
> is the length of the term for the RSE.  For both the "Narrow" and the "Broad"
> interpretations of the role, it seems to me that 5 years is too long.

I agree and think that 3 years would be better.


>  Note that
> the term for Lynn St. Amour as President of ISOC is done in 3 year contracts,
> not 5, and the IAD seems to have no set contract term laid out by RFC (at
> least I did not find it in RFC 4333 or the IASA site).  Glenn noted in
> his plenary
> presentation that the "RSE serves at the pleasure of the IAB", but how that
> is reconciled with a 5 year term is tricky.  If it means the IAB can
> fire the RSE
> at will, then I suggest we say so and eliminate the term; if the IAB
> must coordinate
> with the RSAG or otherwise get community input, I think we have to say
> that whatever term is assigned will almost always be served out (this community
> having real trouble firing anybody).  That argues to me to dropping the term
> length to something like 2 years with renewals up to 5 without a new search
> process.
> Note that someone would have to serve 3 consecutive terms on the IAB
> to be there for both the beginning and end of a 5 year term; that makes
> effective oversight a bit tough.
> regards,
> Ted
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list