Subject: Re: [Iasa20] -02 I-D: Term Length & Limit

From: "Livingood, Jason" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2018 14:39:47 +0000

Good suggestion – I can add that to the -04 update – thanks!

From: iasa20 <[email-masked]> on behalf of John Curran <[email-masked]>
Date: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 10:38 AM
To: "Livingood, Jason" <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Iasa20] -02 I-D: Term Length & Limit

More specifically, I would suggest augmenting the text to in section 4.9 from –

 " This is to ensure a healthy regular introduction of new ideas and energy
    onto the Board, and to mitigate any potential long-term risk of
    ossification or conflict. “

to something such as –

  "The limit on consecutive terms supports the healthy regular introduction of new ideas
   and energy into the Board and mitigates potential long-term risk of ossification or
   conflict, without adversely impacting the potential pool of director candidates over time.”

/John

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2018 15:59:32 -0500

FWIW,

On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 9:39 AM Livingood, Jason <
[email-masked]> wrote:

> *From: *iasa20 <[email-masked]> on behalf of John Curran <
> [email-masked]>
> *Date: *Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 10:38 AM
> *To: *"Livingood, Jason" <[email-masked]>
> *Cc: *"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
> *Subject: *[EXTERNAL] Re: [Iasa20] -02 I-D: Term Length & Limit
>
>
>
>

In general, I appreciate background on why certain decisions were made on a
protocol, so that if the protocol is "wildly successful" and outlives the
people who made those decisions, the next generation of people making
decisions about that protocol aren't in the dark.

I think that's doubly valuable for this document, which (we'd hope) is
going to be relevant (in some form) for quite some time.

John, thanks for making this suggestion, and for making it in a form where
Jason could do the right thing.

Spencer