Tom, This would be a bad idea as a general rule - though it is (I believe) one of the things that ADs look at. The problem is that there are good examples of WGs where the chair was a key author as well and it worked just fine. In addition, there are also examples where a chair has had to step in because (as is often the case when dealing with volunteers) nobody else would step up to the task. -- Eric --[SNIP]-- --> --> I think that the single change most likely to keep WGs on track is to ensure --> that they do not have a single dominant participant, eg one who is both chair --> and author of key I-Ds. The WGs I see most at risk of going round in circles --> and/or producing output that falls short of what is needed are ones such. --> --[SNIP]-- _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf