On 15/02/2022 18:22, Michael Richardson wrote:
tom petch <daedulus@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ev> To be honest, this is not really easy to find volunteers to be
ev> shepherd, but sometimes it works ;-)
tp> My experience is otherwise (Routing, Ops WGs). I think it rare for a
tp> WG Chair to be shepherd and I often see a Chair asking for a
tp> volunteer to be shepherd and getting one, perhaps a Chair of another
If document shepherding is working well in the Routing area, that's really
great news. Can you teach the rest of us how to be better?
Get yourself an AD who encourages the process. I was going to say get a
better AD but that would be wrong, ADs are good already, but I suspect
that this goes back a decade or two, perhaps to just one AD, an AD who
encouraged the chairs to work this way and then this has cascaded down
the successive occupants of the posts, especially when Chairs become ADs.
I think that the AD-Chair relationship is a key factor in the success or
otherwise of the processes, more clearly seen, perhaps, when the
processes are less successful.
Tom Petch
tp> WG. (I am amazed, looking at the Datatracker, how many names there
tp> are that I think of as document authors who are actually WG Chairs of
tp> another WG).
Well, so maybe this is really what's happening: people who are chairs know
the challenges that other chairs have.
tp> Where the process may be less good is the production of the shepherd
tp> report and discussion thereof, taking time and not having a mechanism
tp> for resolution of disagreements between Shepherd and WG Chairs.
!
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
