Perhaps even dedicate a WG-Chairs lunch meeting to it? I think the role has grown over the years. Alia On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 4/03/2013 15:57, John Leslie wrote: >> >> Eggert, Lars <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 4, 2013, at 13:18, Eric Burger <eburger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> I will say it again - the IETF is organized by us. Therefore, this >>>> situation is created by us. We have the power to fix it. We have to >>>> want to fix it. Saying there is nothing we can do because this is the >>>> way it is is the same as saying we do not WANT to fix it. >>> >>> what is "the fix"? >> >> There is an obvious place to look for ideas: the directorates. See: >> >> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/directorate.html > > That would help if the AD job would not be a full time job. Sure. > And I see some suggestions in this email thread to rely more on the > directorates. That makes sense (but reviews vary greatly, however) > One track not mentioned in this thread is the document shepherd. > The document shepherd job, when done according to RFC 4858 (see specifically > section 3.2 and 3.3) would save a huge amount of time to the AD. > Recently, for a single draft, I spent hoouuurrrssss trying to track all the > open issues from the directorates and the IESG, and chasing the authors. On > top of taking some time, I had to be become expert for every single aspect > of the specification to evaluate whether the answer was right... while the > document shepherd has already the expertise. > We should probably stress (again) the importance of document shepherd > function... > > Regards, Benoit > >