On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There's really nothing as awesome as sending Last Call comments on your own > draft. You should try it some time ... or not. > > But please see below. > > ... > > I had a chat with Scott Bradner today, and Scott asked me to explain some > history in a different way. The text he questioned was this: > > OLD > > In the distant past, all IETF Areas had a single Area Director. The > movement from single Area Directors in an Area to pairs of Area > Directors in most Areas happened over a period of years (for > reference, see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/past-members.html), as part > of the IESG organizing itself to do the work the IESG is chartered to > do. > > END > > Scott said that changes in the number of Area Directors assigned to a given > Area during "the modern era", post Kobe, wasn't quite the linear progression > I described, and suggested (my words, trying to capture his thoughts), > something more like this: > > NEW > > While it's true that recent IESGs have had two Area Directors in each Area > except for the General Area, the number of Area Directors in each Area has > varied since https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1396.txt (for reference, see > http://www.ietf.org/iesg/past-members.html). > > This variation was due to a number of factors, including workload and > personal preferences, and happened as a natural part of the IESG organizing > itself to do the work the IESG is chartered to do. > > At one point, the IESG placed three Area Directors in a single Area (Scott > Bradner, Deirdre Kostick, and Michael O'Dell, in the Operational & > Management Requirements Area, between IETF 36 and IETF 37 in 1996). I think it is a good change to the text. It grounds the change to the limit on the number of ADs in real events. Thanks, Donald ============================= Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1-508-333-2270 (cell) 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA d3e3e3@xxxxxxxxx > END > > I wouldn't mind hearing people's opinions about making this change as part > of Last Call, and I don't think the rest of the IESG would mind, either ... > > Thanks! > Spencer > >> Abstract >> >> >> This document removes a limit on the number of Area Directors who >> manage an Area in the definition of "IETF Area". This document >> updates RFC 2026 (BCP 9) and RFC 2418 (BCP 25). >> >>...