Stewart Bryant <stbryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I do have a concern that when the number of ADs falls to one as there > can be issues of conflict of interest that need technical expertise to > resolve. There is also the issue of there being no natural AD for IETF > participants to turn to in such circumstances. It would be useful if > the proposed BCP gave a little guidance to cover such circumstances > such as considering the, perhaps temporary, merging of areas so > that there were three responsible ADs rather than just one. I suspect what you mean is that individual WGs could have their Responsible AD temporarily assigned from another Area (or perhaps their backup AD temporarily assigned). That probably would have helped when Martin was stuck as sole AD in the Trasnport area. And it would be good to allow the IESG leeway to do that. But I'm not sure it belongs in this document... -- John Leslie <john@xxxxxxx>