Re: IAOC: delegating ex-officio responsibility

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

 



On 2011-09-28 08:03, John C Klensin wrote:
<snip>

> ...  Interesting it is exactly the
> assumption that the IAB Chair will have first hand involvement
> in everything that the IAB does that is cited an example of why
> it is necessary to have the IAB Chair on the IASA.   So, if the
> IAB succeeds in reducing the load on the IAB Chair in that way,
> the argument for forcing the IAB Chair to serve on the IAOC and
> Trust is reduced as well.   

I agree, and of course this goes with my bias against the IAB
becoming the I Administration B, which imnsho is a slippery
slope that we are already on.

> 
> I'd also like to see mechanisms explored within the IESG to
> reduce the load on the IETF Chair.

I agree with this phrasing. If Russ isn't too busy (joke), an
update of draft-carpenter-ietf-chair-tasks might be of interest,
especially
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-ietf-chair-tasks-00#section-5

>  To the extent to which being
> General Area AD adds significant work, I'd be happy to see that
> turned into a "real" area and handed off to someone else.  I'm
> not even sure that it is critical that the IETF Chair take a
> lead (and voting) technical role in the IESG; 

Indeed. In the above draft I also distinguished the IETF Chair
role from the IESG Chair role, and whether they can be split is
worth a discussion.

> perhaps the
> community should reevaluate the required skill set and determine
> whether that responsibility (which, of course, includes
> responsibility for document reviews, etc.) is really an optimal
> use of time and skills or whether we should eliminate it and
> look for a different balance of skills.  I'm not recommending
> that -- I can see large disadvantages as well as advantages --
> but I think it is within the range of options the community
> should understand and consider.
> 
>> If we (the community) are going to solve the I* overload
>> problem, it would be good to have some actual data on how the
>> I* chairs spend their time.  It would be good to have a better
>> understanding of the problem before proposing solutions.
> 
> Yes.  And a better understanding of how all sorts of people
> spend their time, if it could actually be obtained, would be
> helpful for all sorts of purposes (e.g,, I'm sure Nomcoms would
> love to know for priority-setting purposes in candidate
> selection)).  But, having sat in one of those seats and had an
> up-close view of how several others have handled them, I think
> one of the things you would find is that each person who does
> those jobs sorts things out, and prioritizes them, a little bit
> differently (maybe a lot differently).  From that perspective,
> the observation that we've got the current IETF Chair and the
> current and immediate past IAB Chairs, supporting this change
> ought to send a relatively strong message... 

And to be clear, I (still the previous IETF Chair) think that
some such change is needed, which is exactly why I wrote the
above draft in 2006. Perhaps the difference is that I see
the IAOC/Trust role as very hard to separate from the IETF Chair
role - but more easily separable from the IESG Chair role.

> unless, again,
> efficiency of the IASA is more important than efficiency of the
> IAB or IESG (and I want to stress that I don't think you have
> said that... if it just my inference about whether some of your
> arguments lead if carried to their logical conclusion).

I think we need all three to be equally efficient; before IASA
existed, we had burning administrative problems. I wouldn't
like to have to rank the importance of the three.

    Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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