Re: On standards review panel and division of work

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Spencer Dawkins wrote:
Hi, Pekka (but not only Pekka),

If I understood Margaret last night, she was at least somewhat comfortable with a hard split between area management and technical review, so I'd like to at least ask one question...

In discussions with John Klensin, I (and I think we) both assumed that the addition of an Standards Review Panel would mean that that the IESG participants remained on the IESG. But now I'm wondering - if we have a future-SRP and a future-IESG, which one of these does the current IESG more closely resemble?

I'm trying to figure out if we're really adding a Standards Review Panel, because the existing IESG is spending too much time on standards review, or whether the existing IESG is spending a LOT of time on standards review, so we're really adding an Internet Engineering Steering Group...

See Sam's comment about where the time goes. But indeed there are two
questions hiding here:

1. What sort of people would NomCom be told to look for the two
roles?

2. Would there be enough suitable people willing to take on both
the AD role truncated of final review responsibility, and the Reviewer
role which has no management responsibility?

[i.e. will these roles appear fulfilling enough to attract a good slate
of candidates?]

     Brian


_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]