RE: Separate ADs roles from IESG

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

 



Agreed, reviewing documents can be separated out.

There's a lot of technical expertise able to review documents, but outside the WG chair/AD/IESG formal hierarchy (and in very different timezones) that may be able to provide document reviews. Provided they never have to go on concalls.

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/


________________________________________
From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon [ted.lemon@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 21 October 2013 00:15
To: Brian E Carpenter
Cc: John C Klensin; IETF Discuss
Subject: Re: Separate ADs roles from IESG

On Oct 20, 2013, at 3:38 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The high-order bit is whether we can separate the functions of
> (a) steering the work of the IETF and (b) applying final quality
> control to the documents. At the moment, these two jobs are bound
> up with each other in the IESG.

It's worth noting that there is a synergy between steering, managing working groups and reviewing documents; if you separate out document review, some of what IESG members need to engage in steering and managing may go away.

BTW, steering doesn't mean dictating the direction the IETF goes; it means being aware of issues that are cropping up, identifying themes that are common, and trying to make people who have less of a bird's-eye view aware of them.   It's not clear to me that you can get this view without consuming a fairly significant amount of time.   Joel's two hours a day is probably enough, but I wouldn't want to see it go a whole lot less than that.






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