Hi All,
At IETF 58, the IESG presented a proposal to build a more effective
IETF management structure by moving more authority and responsibility
from the IESG to our ~220 IETF WG chairs. This message summarizes
some of the feedback we received and proposes that the community
consider the formation of a specific WG to pursue this topic. The
process of WG formation would use the following steps:
- creation of a mailing list to discuss the scope & purpose of the
proposed WG
- discussion/development of a charter on the list
- approval of WG charter by IESG (if appropriate)
Subscription information for the mailing list is provided below.
BACKGROUND
==========
The slides for our original proposal, as presented at the IETF 58
plenary, can be found at:
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/nov2003-minneapolis/iesg-wgchairs.pdf
The minutes from the two IETF 58 plenary sessions, including
discussion of this proposal can be found at:
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/nov2003-minneapolis/plenary-notes.txt
FEEDBACK
========
We received substantial feedback regarding the proposal, both during
the plenaries and elsewhere. Thank you, and keep it coming! While we
heard enough community interest that a further exploration seems
warranted, a number of valid concerns were also raised. For example:
- The community should not increase the authority and
responsibility of WG chairs without correspondingly increasing
their accountability to the IETF community. For example, we need
to be careful that we do not create situations where WG chairs
can unfairly overrule WG consensus.
- Our original timeline was unrealistic and did not offer enough
opportunity for community involvement and feedback. The
community would prefer to discuss and develop potential changes
to our BCPs through an open process, such as an IETF WG.
- For any proposal of change, thought must be given to a long
enough transition period and some experimental deployment
that will help the community determine the impact before
IETF-wide implementation.
- The community needs to consider the motivations of WG chairs,
document editors and active WG participants, to ensure that any
changes will not substantially decrease the number of people
willing to serve in these roles.
We will be modifying our original proposal in response to this
feedback, and submitting it as an Internet-Draft.
Proposed MPOWR Working Group
============================
WG Name: MPOWR (Management Positions - Oversight, Work and Results)
Mailing list: mpowr@ietf.org
To Subscribe: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr
Archives: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr
Expected WG home: General Area
The broad goal of this WG would be to shift more responsibility and
authority to WGs, while ensuring appropriate accountability to the
IETF as a whole. The WG would consider how to move more authority and
responsibility to WGs from the IESG, reviewing both the benefits and
the impacts, and ensuring appropriate accountability to the community.
The expected charter would likely include considering updates to RFCs
2418 and possibly RFC 2026 to support these changes. Depending upon
how charter discussions go, the group could hold a BOF or a first WG
meeting at IETF 59 in Korea.
We will send a strawman charter for this WG to the mpowr@ietf.org
mailing list. Community discussion and feedback can take place there.
If and when the community reaches consensus on a charter for a WG, the
charter will be submitted for approval through the usual IETF WG
creation process.
The IESG will revise its proposal, and submit it as an Internet-Draft
for discussion and consideration by the proposed WG.
Additional proposals for changes in this area are welcome and should
be published as Internet-Drafts and announced on mpowr@ietf.org.
If you are interested in participating in this effort, please
subscribe to the mpowr@ietf.org mailing list, as described above.
If you have suggestions regarding who should (co-)chair this proposed
WG, if and when it is chartered, please send them to Harald Alvestrand
<harald@alvestrand.no>.
