Hiya, To be clear: I fully accept Jay's bona-fides here, and those of whomever he has already had discussions with about this. IOW, I think this is a well intentioned, but fundamentally misguided, ask. On 04/05/2020 01:19, IETF Executive Director wrote: > This email now begins a two week consultation on this Draft Strategic > Plan 2020, closing on Monday 18 May. I don't think that deadline is acceptable. (*) I think it's a fine idea for the LLC folks to be planning how to do things better. I'm allergic to that being done as a "strategic" review. The LLC needs to be mostly driven by the wishes of the community. If the community do not have a 3-5 year strategy (and we clearly do not:-) then I don't see how the LLC can, without the LLC risking, or being perceived to be risking, usurping the community's control over the whole shebang. I suggest we cancel this and find another way for the community to set 3-5 year priorities for the LLC. That should start by asking what the community think could be improved maybe. (But it should start with questions and not proposals.) As a concrete example of why this 2 week review is (IMO) not acceptable, I fundamentally disagree with this as a positive proposition: "LLC strategy closely aligned with the strategic objectives of IESG, IRSG and IAB" The IESG and IAB do not have objectives in a 3-5 year time frame as personnel rotate more often than that. The IRSG are the RG chairs and at-large members selected by the IRTF chair, who is selected by the IAB. (To be open: I was on the IESG, and am currently on the IAB and IRSG.) The people with whom I've served on those bodies were almost all ones with whom I'd happily work again, but neither I nor they can IMO validly set "strategic objectives" in that timeframe, nor could they act as entities with whom the LLC's "strategy" could be aligned, in that timeframe. No discussion of whether or not the concern I express here is crazy or sane could be sorted out in 2 weeks. Therefore a 2 week deadline is unacceptable. Cheers, S. (*) I'm only objecting to the deadline in this mail. I plan a more substantive response where I might well object to the entire concept of the LLC having a "strategy" without that term being highly qualified.
Attachment:
0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
