You are here: Home > Participate > Join a Discussion > RIPE Forum
RIPE Forum v1.4.1

DNS Working Group

Threaded
Collapse

[dns-wg] Volunteer list for RIPE DNS working group chair

User Image

Shane Kerr

2018-09-24 22:55:06 CET

Hello DNS working group,

The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection 
finished yesterday. We had a single volunteer, Dave Knight. He sent us 
the following text by way of motivation:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear colleagues,

I would like you to consider me for a second 3 year term as a co-chair 
of the DNS working group.

In my first term I made it to all but one meeting, have organized the 
agenda for a few and chaired sessions at several, I’d like to think that 
those have gone well.

I continue to have my employers support for the required time and travel 
and am enthusiastic about continuing in this role.

Thanks for your consideration,
dave
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Dave on the list.

Thank you Dave for volunteering!

Cheers,

--
Shane
On behalf of the DNS working group chairs

User Image

Joe Abley

2018-09-25 02:01:04 CET

On Sep 24, 2018, at 13:55, Shane Kerr <shane _at_ time-travellers _dot_ org> wrote:

> Hello DNS working group,
>
> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection
> finished yesterday. We had a single volunteer, Dave Knight.

Dave is clearly the right person for the job, quite aside from also
being the only available option :-)

> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Dave on the list.

This is a bit of a strange process. When your choice is reduced to a
single well-qualified option, is it not possible just to skip to the
end?

> Thank you Dave for volunteering!

I would suggest everybody buy him a beer in Amsterdam, but that seems
like it would be an awful lot of beer for one person.


Joe

User Image

Victoria Risk

2018-09-25 02:30:43 CET

> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Dave on the list.
> 
> Thank you Dave for volunteering!

Congratulations Dave!  and Thank you for continuing on in this role.


Victoria Risk
Product Manager
Internet Systems Consortium
vicky _at_ isc _dot_ org





User Image

Shane Kerr

2018-09-25 12:23:54 CET

Joe,

On 2018-09-25 02:01, Joe Abley wrote:
> On Sep 24, 2018, at 13:55, Shane Kerr <shane _at_ time-travellers _dot_ org> wrote:
> 
>> Hello DNS working group,
>>
>> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection
>> finished yesterday. We had a single volunteer, Dave Knight.
> 
> Dave is clearly the right person for the job, quite aside from also
> being the only available option :-)

[chair hat off]

I think so too!

>> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Dave on the list.
> 
> This is a bit of a strange process. When your choice is reduced to a
> single well-qualified option, is it not possible just to skip to the
> end?

[chair hat on]

We did not consider the case where only a single volunteer would come 
forward, nor the case where no volunteers came forward. I know we do not 
need to be too strict, but I would prefer not to change the selection 
process in the middle. I do not think that any harm is done by following it.

[chair hat off]

Even in the case where only a single option is available, allowing the 
working group to show support reinforces the legitimacy of the 
volunteer, both to the outside world and to the working group itself. It 
is quite possible that a candidate could come forward which made working 
group participants uneasy, and having a chance to say so seems useful to me.

>> Thank you Dave for volunteering!
> 
> I would suggest everybody buy him a beer in Amsterdam, but that seems
> like it would be an awful lot of beer for one person.

I hear Dave also likes cola, and I think that he is there for DNS 
OARC/CENTR too, so we can spread the love around in various ways. 😉

Cheers,

--
Shane

User Image

João Luis Silva Damas

2018-09-25 12:35:04 CET

And, for what is worth, I agree with Shane’s statements 

Joao

> On 25 Sep 2018, at 12:23, Shane Kerr <shane _at_ time-travellers _dot_ org> wrote:
> 
> Joe,
> 
> On 2018-09-25 02:01, Joe Abley wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 2018, at 13:55, Shane Kerr <shane _at_ time-travellers _dot_ org> wrote:
>>> Hello DNS working group,
>>> 
>>> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection
>>> finished yesterday. We had a single volunteer, Dave Knight.
>> Dave is clearly the right person for the job, quite aside from also
>> being the only available option :-)
> 
> [chair hat off]
> 
> I think so too!
> 
>>> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Dave on the list.
>> This is a bit of a strange process. When your choice is reduced to a
>> single well-qualified option, is it not possible just to skip to the
>> end?
> 
> [chair hat on]
> 
> We did not consider the case where only a single volunteer would come forward, nor the case where no volunteers came forward. I know we do not need to be too strict, but I would prefer not to change the selection process in the middle. I do not think that any harm is done by following it.
> 
> [chair hat off]
> 
> Even in the case where only a single option is available, allowing the working group to show support reinforces the legitimacy of the volunteer, both to the outside world and to the working group itself. It is quite possible that a candidate could come forward which made working group participants uneasy, and having a chance to say so seems useful to me.
> 
>>> Thank you Dave for volunteering!
>> I would suggest everybody buy him a beer in Amsterdam, but that seems
>> like it would be an awful lot of beer for one person.
> 
> I hear Dave also likes cola, and I think that he is there for DNS OARC/CENTR too, so we can spread the love around in various ways. 😉
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Shane
> 


User Image

Janos Zsako

2018-09-25 13:30:17 CET

Dear DNS working group,

> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Dave on the list.

I do support Dave. I think he did a good job so far and I am glad he is
willing to continue.

Also, I have no problem with having a single candidate this time.

Best regards,
Janos


> Thank you Dave for volunteering!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- 
> Shane
> On behalf of the DNS working group chairs
> 

User Image

Niall O'Reilly

2018-09-25 16:26:02 CET

On 25 Sep 2018, at 11:23, Shane Kerr wrote:

> Even in the case where only a single option is available, allowing the working group to show support reinforces the legitimacy of the volunteer, both to the outside world and to the working group itself. It is quite possible that a candidate could come forward which made working group participants uneasy, and having a chance to say so seems useful to me.

What I wanted to write, but better written.
Niall
User Image

Niall O'Reilly

2018-09-25 16:30:40 CET

On 24 Sep 2018, at 21:55, Shane Kerr wrote:

> Please offer whatever support [...] you have for Dave on the list.
Delighted.

Dave Knight

2020-10-14 15:29:56 CET

Colleagues,

The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear DNS WG co-chairs,

I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.

I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.

Regards,
Joao Luis Silva Damas
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.


Thanks,
dave, for the DNS wg chairs
User Image

Piotr Strzyżewski

2020-10-14 15:54:25 CET

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 09:29:56AM -0400, Dave Knight wrote:
> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.

I support Joao.

Best,
Piotr

-- 
Piotr Strzyżewski

User Image

Roland van Rijswijk

2020-10-14 15:55:56 CET

+1, I support Joao for another term.

> On 14 Oct 2020, at 15:29, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
> 
> Colleagues,
> 
> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
> 
> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
> 
> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
> 
> Regards,
> Joao Luis Silva Damas
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> dave, for the DNS wg chairs

-- Roland M. van Rijswijk-Deij
-- NLnet Labs


User Image

Benno Overeinder

2020-10-14 16:46:11 CET

I support Joao for another term.

— Benno

> On 14 Oct 2020, at 15:29, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
> 
> Colleagues,
> 
> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
> 
> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
> 
> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
> 
> Regards,
> Joao Luis Silva Damas
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> dave, for the DNS wg chairs

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/


Vincent Piocel

2020-10-14 17:29:00 CET

+1

> Le 14 oct. 2020 à 16:46, Benno Overeinder <benno _at_ nlnetlabs _dot_ nl> a écrit :
> 
> I support Joao for another term.
> 
> — Benno
> 
>> On 14 Oct 2020, at 15:29, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
>> 
>> Colleagues,
>> 
>> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
>> 
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
>> 
>> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
>> 
>> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Joao Luis Silva Damas
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> dave, for the DNS wg chairs
> 
> -- 
> Benno J. Overeinder
> NLnet Labs
> https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
> 
> 


User Image

Janos Zsako

2020-10-14 17:30:17 CET

Dear all,

> ... a single volunteer, Joao Damas.

> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.

I fully support Joao. I am glad he is willing to serve another term.

Best regards,
Janos

> Thanks,
> dave, for the DNS wg chairs
> 

Jim Reid

2020-10-14 17:32:23 CET


> On 14 Oct 2020, at 14:29, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
> 
> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas

I support Joao’s reappointment.


User Image

Abdullah Cemil Akcam

2020-10-14 18:42:43 CET

+1
________________________________
From: dns-wg <dns-wg-bounces _at_ ripe _dot_ net> on behalf of Vincent Piocel via dns-wg <dns-wg _at_ ripe _dot_ net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 6:29:00 PM
To: Benno Overeinder <benno _at_ nlnetlabs _dot_ nl>
Cc: RIPE DNS WG <dns-wg _at_ ripe _dot_ net>
Subject: Re: [dns-wg] Volunteer list for RIPE DNS working group chair

+1

> Le 14 oct. 2020 à 16:46, Benno Overeinder <benno _at_ nlnetlabs _dot_ nl> a écrit :
>
> I support Joao for another term.
>
> — Benno
>
>> On 14 Oct 2020, at 15:29, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
>>
>> Colleagues,
>>
>> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
>>
>> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
>>
>> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Joao Luis Silva Damas
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> dave, for the DNS wg chairs
>
> --
> Benno J. Overeinder
> NLnet Labs
> https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/
>
>




[BTK]   Abdullah Cemil AKÇAM
Bilişim Uzmanı
Bilgi Teknolojileri Dairesi Başkanlığı

Tel: +90 312 586 52 82
Adres: Eskişehir Yolu 10.Km No: 276 Posta Kodu: 06530 Çankaya/Ankara

www.btk.gov.tr
_ _ _ __ _ _ _





________________________________
YASAL UYARI:
Bu e-postada yer alan bilgiler, beraberinde iletilen tüm bilgi, onay ve her türlü formattaki dosyalar, gizlidir ve kişiye özel olabilir ve sadece gönderildiği kişi ya da kuruma ya da bu bilgileri kullanmaya ya da almaya yetkili diğer kişilere özeldir. Eğer siz doğru kişi değilseniz, bu e-postayı açıklamak, kopyalamak, dağıtmak ya da içeriğine istinaden işlem yapmak tümüyle yasaktır ve kanuna aykırı olabilir. Bu nedenle bu e-postayı yanlışlıkla aldıysanız, bu durumu derhal gönderene haber veriniz ve e-postayı siliniz. Bu e-postanın tarafınıza yanlışlıkla iletilmiş olması yüzünden e-postanın gizli ve kişiye özel niteliği kaybolmaz ya da bu niteliğinden vazgeçilmez. BTK, bu e-postada yer alan bilgilerin ya da e-postanın kendisinin usulüne göre ve/veya tam iletiminden ya da e-postanın alınmasında yaşanan herhangi bir gecikmeden sorumlu değildir. BTK bu e-postanın içeriği ile ilgili olarak hiç bir hukuksal sorumluluğu kabul etmez. BTK, virüs filtreleme uygulamakla birlikte, e-postanın virüs içermediğini garanti ya da temin etmez.

DISCLAIMER:
The information, consent and file attached thereto, contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and others authorized to use it or receive it. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in reliance of the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If therefore you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and then delete it. Confidentiality and legal privileges are not waived or lost even if you have been accidentally transmitted by this e-mail. ICTA is not responsible for the proper and/or complete transmission of the information contained in this e-mail or of the e-mail itself nor in any delay in its receipt. ICTA does not accept any form of legal responsibility for the content of this e-mail. Whilst ICTA does apply virus filtering, it provides no guarantee or warranty that the e-mail is virus-free.

User Image

Zarko Kecic

2020-10-14 18:48:12 CET

I support Joao’s reappointment.

Žarko

-----Original Message-----
Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
User Image

Eduardo Duarte

2020-10-14 18:51:31 CET

Dear all,

I support Joao nomination.

Best regards,
eduardo_sign
 
Aviso de Confidencialidade/Disclaimer:
Este e-mail foi escrito de acordo com o novo acordo ortográfico.
Esta mensagem é exclusivamente destinada ao seu destinatário, podendo
conter informação CONFIDENCIAL, cuja divulgação está expressamente
vedada nos termos da lei. Caso tenha recepcionado indevidamente
esta mensagem, solicitamos-lhe que nos comunique esse mesmo facto por
esta via devendo apagar o seu conteúdo de imediato.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. It may contain
CONFIDENTIAL information protected by law. If this message has been
received by error, please notify us via e-mail and delete it immediately.
[ Antes de imprimir esta mensagem pense no ambiente. Before printing
this message, think about environment ]
Às 14:29 de 14/10/20, Dave Knight escreveu:
> Colleagues,
>
> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
>
> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
>
> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
>
> Regards,
> Joao Luis Silva Damas
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
>
>
> Thanks,
> dave, for the DNS wg chairs

User Image

Edward Lewis

2020-10-14 19:18:58 CET

On 10/14/20, 9:30 AM, "dns-wg on behalf of Dave Knight" <dns-wg-bounces _at_ ripe _dot_ net on behalf of dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:

>Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.

Support for Joao.

User Image

Victoria Risk

2020-10-14 19:19:49 CET

Thank you Joao for volunteering again! 

+1


Victoria Risk
Internet Systems Consortium
vicky _at_ isc _dot_ org

> On Oct 14, 2020, at 9:51 AM, Eduardo Duarte via dns-wg <dns-wg _at_ ripe _dot_ net> wrote:
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I support Joao nomination.
> 
> Best regards,
>  
>  
> Aviso de Confidencialidade/Disclaimer: 
> Este e-mail foi escrito de acordo com o novo acordo ortográfico.
> Esta mensagem é exclusivamente destinada ao seu destinatário, podendo conter informação CONFIDENCIAL, cuja divulgação está expressamente vedada nos termos da lei. Caso tenha recepcionado indevidamente 
> esta mensagem, solicitamos-lhe que nos comunique esse mesmo facto por esta via devendo apagar o seu conteúdo de imediato. 
> This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. It may contain CONFIDENTIAL information protected by law. If this message has been received by error, please notify us via e-mail and delete it immediately.
> [ Antes de imprimir esta mensagem pense no ambiente. Before printing this message, think about environment ]
> Às 14:29 de 14/10/20, Dave Knight escreveu:
>> Colleagues,
>> 
>> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
>> 
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
>> 
>> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
>> 
>> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Joao Luis Silva Damas
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> dave, for the DNS wg chairs







Carlos M. Martinez

2020-10-14 19:20:10 CET

Unconditional support :-)

On 14 Oct 2020, at 10:29, Dave Knight wrote:

> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the 
> list.

Ralf Weber

2020-10-14 19:48:48 CET

Moin!


On 14 Oct 2020, at 15:29, Dave Knight wrote:

> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection 
> has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas.

I support Joao’s appointment as DNS working group chair and want to 
thank him for his continued service.

So long
-Ralf
——-
Ralf Weber

User Image

Matthijs Mekking

2020-10-15 08:29:33 CET

+1 support for Joao.

Matthijs

On 10/14/20 3:29 PM, Dave Knight wrote:
> Colleagues,
> 
> The nomination period for the RIPE DNS working group chair selection has completed with a single volunteer, Joao Damas. He sent us the following text:
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Dear DNS WG co-chairs,
> 
> I send this email as an individual to put my name into the pool of candidates for DNS WG chair role up for election during RIPE 81.
> 
> I would like to continue this role for one more term as I believe I can still contribute positively to the Working Group and the RIPE Community in general as I have done for the this term, bringing topical content and discussions to the Working Group, reacting to the current situation by working with the Group’s co-chairs to have periodic online sessions that keep us all as a group and working with the other working group chairs at RIPE to continue developing the community.
> 
> Regards,
> Joao Luis Silva Damas
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> dave, for the DNS wg chairs
> 

User Image

Elmar K. Bins

2020-10-15 10:13:48 CET

> On 10/14/20 3:29 PM, Dave Knight wrote:
> > Please offer whatever support (or opposition) you have for Joao on the list.

Supporting Joao is a no-brainer - +1

Elmar.


User Image

Randy Bush

2020-10-15 19:47:11 CET

> Supporting Joao is a no-brainer - +1

actually, i would suggest it is not.

[ aside: i like joão, and think he has done a fine job.  i might join
  the +1s, except for the following ]

i thought we wanted to encourage new/young folk to enter and play.  when
we have an 'election' and an incumbent instantly steps up, and 42 people
all say +1, all within a day or two, this is a total barrier to any new
entrant.

so, to put our money where our mouths are [0] two suggestions

  o no +1s.  leave it until the actual election

  o we might think about term limits

randy

--

[0] idiom meaning to walk what we talk [1]

[1] idiom meaning to do as we say :)

Jim Reid

2020-10-15 20:21:52 CET


> On 15 Oct 2020, at 18:47, Randy Bush <randy _at_ psg _dot_ com> wrote:
> 
> 
>  o no +1s.  leave it until the actual election

RIPE does not vote!!! Important decisions get taken by consensus, not elections.

It’s beyond stupid to talk about an election or use that mechanism when there are no eligibility criteria on who gets to vote or constraints on how often they can do that.

RIPE NCC uses votes. Which is fine. The NCC has a legal identity and a clearly defined membership which is underpinned by contracts and fees. The RIPE community has none of these things.

>  o we might think about term limits

We already have. They’ve been built into the co-chair *selection* process from the start:

https://www.ripe.net/participate/ripe/wg/active-wg/dns/dns-wg-chair-selection-process


User Image

Janos Zsako

2020-10-15 21:30:07 CET

Dear Randy,

With all respect my respect for you, I still support Joao.

>    o we might think about term limits

I think putting a term limit may prevent talented people from serving the
community in spite of their willingness to continue their useful work.

If there were many candidates with similar qualities, I would have no
problem with asking for change.

Best regards,
Janos

> randy
> 
> --
> 
> [0] idiom meaning to walk what we talk [1]
> 
> [1] idiom meaning to do as we say :)
> 

User Image

João Luis Silva Damas

2020-10-15 21:49:14 CET

Hi Randy 
I agree with you and that’s why i pushed for the dns wg to have a blind period of candidate collection during which no one sees who else might be volunteering. What you see now is the publication of the candidate list after that period elapsed. Turns out no one else volunteered
On top of that we have term limits to “force” renewal, so basically I think we agree 

Joao 

> On 15 Oct 2020, at 19:47, Randy Bush <randy _at_ psg _dot_ com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Supporting Joao is a no-brainer - +1
> 
> actually, i would suggest it is not.
> 
> [ aside: i like joão, and think he has done a fine job.  i might join
>  the +1s, except for the following ]
> 
> i thought we wanted to encourage new/young folk to enter and play.  when
> we have an 'election' and an incumbent instantly steps up, and 42 people
> all say +1, all within a day or two, this is a total barrier to any new
> entrant.
> 
> so, to put our money where our mouths are [0] two suggestions
> 
>  o no +1s.  leave it until the actual election
> 
>  o we might think about term limits
> 
> randy
> 
> --
> 
> [0] idiom meaning to walk what we talk [1]
> 
> [1] idiom meaning to do as we say :)
> 

Jim Reid

2020-10-15 21:50:46 CET


> On 15 Oct 2020, at 20:30, Janos Zsako <zsako _at_ iszt _dot_ hu> wrote:
> 
> I think putting a term limit may prevent talented people from serving the
> community in spite of their willingness to continue their useful work.

I agree and disagree with this Janos. Term limits might well mean somebody good gets forced to quit prematurely. On the other hand, they ensure there are opportunities to bring in somebody new => fresh approach, new ideas, etc, etc. A regular but prudent approach to leadership changes is generally a very healthy thing to do: just enough to stop things from getting stale but not stopping other talented people from getting a chance to run things.
User Image

Randy Bush

2020-10-15 22:01:57 CET

hi joão,

> I agree with you and that’s why i pushed for the dns wg to have a
> blind period of candidate collection during which no one sees who else
> might be volunteering. What you see now is the publication of the
> candidate list after that period elapsed. Turns out no one else
> volunteered

as the dns-wg is not the only one with the same symptom in this season,
then, assuming we want fresh blood, i suspect have a systemic failure.
but i take your point that we have tried to fix it.  how do we get new
folk in the game?

randy

Dave Knight

2020-10-15 23:47:26 CET

Randy,


> On Oct 15, 2020, at 4:01 PM, Randy Bush <randy _at_ psg _dot_ com> wrote:
> 
> hi joão,
> 
>> I agree with you and that’s why i pushed for the dns wg to have a
>> blind period of candidate collection during which no one sees who else
>> might be volunteering. What you see now is the publication of the
>> candidate list after that period elapsed. Turns out no one else
>> volunteered
> 
> as the dns-wg is not the only one with the same symptom in this season,
> then, assuming we want fresh blood, i suspect have a systemic failure.


During 2004 there was a merging of all things DNS into this working group and from around then and for the next ten or so years we had these co-chairs

Jaap Akkerhuis
Peter Koch
Jim Reid

In July 2015 we adopted the new chair selection process and it was decided that the then current chairs would step down one per year over the following three years.

The new process has been exercised several times since then with these results

Nov 2015, RIPE 71  Peter Koch was succeeded by Dave Knight for a 3 year term
Oct 2016, RIPE 73  Jim Reid was succeeded by Shane Kerr for a 3 year term
Oct 2017, RIPE 75  Jaap Akkerhuis was succeeded by Joao Damas for a 3 year term

Having observed that in all of the three above cases the first person to respond to the call for nominations was selected to be a co-chair we changed our interpretation of the process and asked that future nominations be sent to the wg chairs to be released en masse in order to preclude a first responder advantage.

Oct 2018, RIPE 77  Dave Knight was the only volunteer and is serving a second and final three year term
Oct 2019, RIPE 79  Shane Kerr was the only volunteer and is serving a second and final three year term
Oct 2020, RIPE 81  Joao Damas is the only volunteer

... which I think shows that in recent years the working group has made reasonable efforts to hold the door open to fresh blood, it just doesn't seem terribly keen to use it.


> but i take your point that we have tried to fix it.  how do we get new folk in the game?


We have three year terms and a two term limit. I'm out a year from now, then Shane and then Joao one and two years later. There will have to be fresh blood then!


If the working group feels strongly about encouraging new faces perhaps we should amend the process such that new co-chairs may servce onlky a single term?

dave

Jim Reid

2020-10-16 00:24:01 CET


> On 15 Oct 2020, at 22:47, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
> 
> The new process has been exercised several times since then with these results
> 
> Nov 2015, RIPE 71  Peter Koch was succeeded by Dave Knight for a 3 year term
> Oct 2016, RIPE 73  Jim Reid was succeeded by Shane Kerr for a 3 year term
> Oct 2017, RIPE 75  Jaap Akkerhuis was succeeded by Joao Damas for a 3 year term

When the selection process was introduced, Jaap, Peter and myself said we would all be standing down to make way for new people. That procedure was the catalyst for regime change that probably should have happened earlier than it did. This was carried out over 2 years to allow for a phased handover. 

The current arrangement with term limits is intended to help with that too. That way, there’s an orderly transition and the newcomer gets time to settle in and learn from their more experienced co-chairs.

> If the working group feels strongly about encouraging new faces perhaps we should amend the process such that new co-chairs may servce onlky a single term?

I’m not sure. Serving a single three year term seems too short IMO. A bit more stability would be desirable. Besides, is it the selection procedure that's discouraging new faces or could it be the incumbents are doing such a good job, nobody feels the need to disrupt that? Let’s first identify the problem before deciding what the solution is.

Maybe the co-chairs need to do a little succession planning: finding suitable candidates to mentor and then encouraging them to volunteer when the term limits kick in.



Paul Ebersman

2020-10-16 00:25:47 CET

dave> If the working group feels strongly about encouraging new faces
dave> perhaps we should amend the process such that new co-chairs may
dave> servce onlky a single term?

Maybe have the outgoing and existing chairs explicitly go out and
encourage someone who hasn't served before to volunteer? And have the
chairs available to mentor/counsel newbies?

Doesn't need to be a rule/bylaw change, just an intention.

User Image

Leo Vegoda

2020-10-16 00:40:07 CET

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 3:24 PM Jim Reid <jim _at_ rfc1035 _dot_ com> wrote:

[...]

> I’m not sure. Serving a single three year term seems too short IMO. A bit more stability would be desirable. Besides, is it the selection procedure that's discouraging new faces or could it be the incumbents are doing such a good job, nobody feels the need to disrupt that? Let’s first identify the problem before deciding what the solution is.

I agree that the current chairs have done a superb job.

I wonder if people are hesitant to put their hat in the ring because
they are not sure that they can commit the time, or are concerned that
their employers might be less than supportive?

The former could be overcome by sharing details of how much time the
chairs need to dedicate to managing the WG.

> Maybe the co-chairs need to do a little succession planning: finding suitable candidates to mentor and then encouraging them to volunteer when the term limits kick in.

Succession planning is good but placing the burden on the chairs
themselves seems a lot to ask.

Regards,

Leo

Dave Knight

2020-10-16 01:00:16 CET


> On Oct 15, 2020, at 6:25 PM, Paul Ebersman <list-ripe-dns-wg _at_ dragon _dot_ net> wrote:
> 
> dave> If the working group feels strongly about encouraging new faces
> dave> perhaps we should amend the process such that new co-chairs may
> dave> servce onlky a single term?
> 
> Maybe have the outgoing and existing chairs explicitly go out and
> encourage someone who hasn't served before to volunteer?

I struggle to reconcile our efforts toward impartiality with the notion of having the chairs encouraging a preferred candidate.


> And have the chairs available to mentor/counsel newbies?

When I came aboard I had a lot of support from Peter, Jim, and Jaap for which I was grateful and that I intend to pay forward when the time comes.


> Doesn't need to be a rule/bylaw change, just an intention.

I could serve two terms. At the end of the first one I decided I wanted to serve a second, and encouraging someone else to apply for the job was not my priority :p

If we want to switch out chairs more frequently than every six years we should do it in the rules.


dave

Jim Reid

2020-10-16 01:13:23 CET


> On 16 Oct 2020, at 00:00, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
> 
>> Maybe have the outgoing and existing chairs explicitly go out and
>> encourage someone who hasn't served before to volunteer?
> 
> I struggle to reconcile our efforts toward impartiality with the notion of having the chairs encouraging a preferred candidate.

It depends on what’s meant by encouragement. I'm fairly sure Paul means approaching someone (or more than one) and saying “Have you ever thought of becoming a WG co-chair?”. Which would be fine. He almost certainly wasn’t meaning the co-chairs dictate to the WG who they must select. Which obviously would not be fine.

Encouraging someone to stand doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a preferred candidate (after all the WG makes the selection) or impartiality has been compromised.


Jim Reid

2020-10-16 01:21:05 CET


> On 15 Oct 2020, at 23:40, Leo Vegoda <leo _at_ vegoda _dot_ org> wrote:
> 
> Succession planning is good but placing the burden on the chairs themselves seems a lot to ask.

I strongly disagree Leo. For one thing, any burden from things like this is why WG co-chairs get the big bucks. :-) When you’re in a leadership position (for some definition of that term), it’s reasonable to be expected to show some... er... leadership. Succession planning comes with the territory. As is making an orderly handover when your term ends.

Succession planning is not a lot to ask in terms of time or effort. Or shouldn’t be. In my experience it’s far less of a resource drain than planning or running a WG session. How hard can it be to identify a couple of possible candidates, explain what the job entails (preferably over a tasty beverage) and ask them if they’d be interested or willing to stand as a co-chair?

Finally, if a WG's co-chairs can’t or won’t do the succession planning who will? [Hopefully not yet another NomCom.] And would their efforts have any credibility? Imagine if it was someone who had never run a WG or understood the WG dynamics who tried to do the succession planning.


Paul Ebersman

2020-10-16 01:22:16 CET

dknight> I struggle to reconcile our efforts toward impartiality with
dknight> the notion of having the chairs encouraging a preferred
dknight> candidate.


jim> It depends on what's meant by encouragement. I'm fairly sure Paul
jim> means approaching someone (or more than one) and saying "Have you
jim> ever thought of becoming a WG co-chair?".

Yes. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

The DNS community has a lot of folks who have been around and known each
other for a very long time. That's a good thing but can make it very
intimidating for someone "new" to volunteer. Being a bit more active in
finding promising folks who haven't had a chance to contribute as much
yet seems like a good thing.

And I'm sure all the chairs have been and will be very supportive of
anyone new. But also saying that to a potential volunteer explicitly
also might make someone more comfortable about putting their hat in the
ring.

Dave Knight

2020-10-16 01:42:43 CET


> On Oct 15, 2020, at 6:24 PM, Jim Reid <jim _at_ rfc1035 _dot_ com> wrote:
> 
>> On 15 Oct 2020, at 22:47, Dave Knight <dave _at_ shl _dot_ io> wrote:
> 
>> If the working group feels strongly about encouraging new faces perhaps we should amend the process such that new co-chairs may servce onlky a single term?
> 
> I’m not sure. Serving a single three year term seems too short IMO. A bit more stability would be desirable. Besides, is it the selection procedure that's discouraging new faces or could it be the incumbents are doing such a good job, nobody feels the need to disrupt that?

To be honest, I think the current situation is fine. If a co-chair is doing a great job then they probably get to serve for six years, if not they'll only serve three, if they're terrible the working group can replace them more expeditiously. We have a fair and open process which is exercised at least once per year and gives all comers an equal opportunity to throw their hat into the ring.


> Let’s first identify the problem before deciding what the solution is.

I think the working group did that several years ago and we're already living the solution.


> Maybe the co-chairs need to do a little succession planning: finding suitable candidates to mentor and then encouraging them to volunteer when the term limits kick in.

We're a year away from having an actual problem that may possibly need to be solved. I'd feel more comfortable encouraging everyone from the podium than individuals in the corridors, but I'm sure I could get over that if we actually find ourselves low on candidates.

In the last couple of times we have exercised the process we've had something like two weeks for private nominations followed by two weeks for public expressions of support. If we make the initial period longer it would give the chairs more time to do something proactive about a dearth of volunteers.


dave
User Image

Peter Koch

2020-10-16 09:27:40 CET

Dave, all,

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 05:47:26PM -0400, Dave Knight wrote:

> Nov 2015, RIPE 71  Peter Koch was succeeded by Dave Knight for a 3 year term
> Oct 2016, RIPE 73  Jim Reid was succeeded by Shane Kerr for a 3 year term
> Oct 2017, RIPE 75  Jaap Akkerhuis was succeeded by Joao Damas for a 3 year term
> 
> Having observed that in all of the three above cases the first person to respond to the call for nominations was selected to be a co-chair we changed our interpretation of the process and asked that future nominations be sent to the wg chairs to be released en masse in order to preclude a first responder advantage.
> 
> Oct 2018, RIPE 77  Dave Knight was the only volunteer and is serving a second and final three year term
> Oct 2019, RIPE 79  Shane Kerr was the only volunteer and is serving a second and final three year term
> Oct 2020, RIPE 81  Joao Damas is the only volunteer

thanks a lot for adding data and thereby getting the history straight and the current rules on the table.
Also appreaciate the learning from take one.

I'd just add that in the first round none of you three was really new (feature) and two, IIRC, weren't
even new to the chair role (data point).

The current trio has done a very good job, IMHO, especially by adding the regular zoom sessions during the course
of the year.  Other than that, the WG (and that might apply to some other RIPE WGs more or less) is little
more(*) than a specialized track in the overall RIPE program.  Traffic on the list is low (I know I'm
showing my age by even mentioning the mailing list as an indicator) and dominated by this very thread,
meeting announcements and announcements of RIPE Labs articles, usually with little subsequent discussion.
That's OK and in particular I don't think that's a fault and even less a fault of the chairs, but it
could put importance and emotions (around voting or acclamation) a bit into perspective.

The (*) little more is the function as a resonance chamber (not to be confused with echo chamber)
for the RIPE NCC's DNS activities, of course.

Best,
  Peter

User Image

Benno Overeinder

2020-10-16 13:36:47 CET

On 15 Oct 2020, at 22:01, Randy Bush <randy _at_ psg _dot_ com> wrote:
> 
> as the dns-wg is not the only one with the same symptom in this season,
> then, assuming we want fresh blood, i suspect have a systemic failure.
> but i take your point that we have tried to fix it.  how do we get new
> folk in the game?
> 

Just to pitch an old (from last year) idea of mine is to reserve a cochair seat for a junior person (junior can be defined in several ways, not necessarily age).  

With three co-chairs, one can have two seasoned persons, selected as we do now, and one fresh/new co-chair who can learn on the job.  In Rotterdam I discussed this idea with some WG chairs and at the end of the Routing WG session in Rotterdam.  Job (co-chair Routing WG, cc-ing this email) responded positively.  However, I did not follow up on this idea, but I am happy to pick up the stick and coordinate this with others.

— Benno

-- 
Benno J. Overeinder
NLnet Labs
https://www.nlnetlabs.nl/


User Image

Niall O'Reilly

2020-10-16 14:36:52 CET

Dave,

On 15 Oct 2020, at 22:47, Dave Knight wrote:

> […] During 2004 […]

Thank you for this clear and for me very helpful presentation of the 
state of play.

Niall

User Image

Leo Vegoda

2020-10-16 17:52:13 CET

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 4:21 PM Jim Reid <jim _at_ rfc1035 _dot_ com> wrote:
> > On 15 Oct 2020, at 23:40, Leo Vegoda <leo _at_ vegoda _dot_ org> wrote:
> >
> > Succession planning is good but placing the burden on the chairs themselves seems a lot to ask.
>
> I strongly disagree Leo. For one thing, any burden from things like this is why WG co-chairs get the big bucks. :-) When you’re in a leadership position (for some definition of that term), it’s reasonable to be expected to show some... er... leadership. Succession planning comes with the territory. As is making an orderly handover when your term ends.
>
> Succession planning is not a lot to ask in terms of time or effort. Or shouldn’t be. In my experience it’s far less of a resource drain than planning or running a WG session. How hard can it be to identify a couple of possible candidates, explain what the job entails (preferably over a tasty beverage) and ask them if they’d be interested or willing to stand as a co-chair?

I agree that having conversations with potential nominees to the role
is completely appropriate. I just don't think that counts as planning.
It's really just a hope that people with the right skills will be
available at the right time.

> Finally, if a WG's co-chairs can’t or won’t do the succession planning who will? [Hopefully not yet another NomCom.] And would their efforts have any credibility? Imagine if it was someone who had never run a WG or understood the WG dynamics who tried to do the succession planning.

A NomCom can't plan because its role is to select from the available
options. Planning for this really needs to be done over a period of
years so that we're not just relying on a couple of conversations over
beer and the hope that people will have the time to volunteer.

Regards,

Leo