Re: Possible new Real-Time Applications and Infrastucture (RAI)Area

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

 



Hi Lakshminath,

The end result is that we have documents in the RFC Ed queue with another document in the wings called draft-blah-clarifications

I'm plotting the growth rate of draft-blah-clarifications, and my current estimate is that it will exceed the size of draft-blah-original before draft-blah-original
becomes an RFC.

(But we are in deep trouble if the only part of the organization that does
reviews is the IESG.)

I am curious about the scheduling issues. If the IESG job is a "full-time" job, why can't the people on IESG find time to meet with each other, f2f or in telecons; perhaps someone will help me understand that. The other issue that comes up is time zones. We've had this in the Nomcom and I found out recently that telecons at odd hours is the norm if you work in some SDOs. I think these should be non-issues really.

Perhaps the IESG job description should say in part, "you are expected to work some 35-40 hours a week on IESG stuff, should keep your calendar open in the months of ... for a retreat, and should be able to participate in telecons at odd hours." If you remove IESG from that sentence, it probably is already in many IETFers' job descriptions.

This isn't a comment on the scaling issue (I think it needs to be considered)
but I'm a bit surprised that the above isn't already a part of the job
description... The Internet is important, and we should not treat the
management of its technical direction as a hobby that you do on
top of your day-time job. Maybe in some special cases, but not as
general rule.

--Jari


_______________________________________________

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]