Re: Looking for Area Directors Under Lampposts

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

 



> On Nov 16, 2015, at 3:41 AM 11/16/15, Stewart Bryant (stbryant) <stbryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> Scott,
> 
> You are absolutely correct.

I agree, as well...

> 
> An interesting question is whether we could design a distributed system that achieves the same effect at the same (or better) quality?
> 
> For example, could we achieve the same effect by convening a review panel for each ID consisting of one or two members of the directorate of every area?

I think ADs could take this action independently, if they choose to and without any formalism, under the more general umbrella of delegating responsibility to the directorates...

- Ralph

> 
> -Stewart
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On 15 Nov 2015, at 20:11, Scott O. Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> Maybe I missed it, but I do not recall seeing mention in this thread of a significant aspect 
>> of an ADs role – reviewing documents from outside there area – i.e., the 
>> cross-jurisdictional review step that the IESG review represents.
>> 
>> This is a major differentiator between the IETF and most other IT 
>> standards development organizations.   In most other organizations 
>> the only technical expertise applied to a proposal comes from within a 
>> working group (working party etc) – a group that will always have a 
>> limited scope of expertise
>> 
>> The IESG’s cross-area review ensures that proposals undergo 
>> review by experts in areas that will likely not be represented within 
>> a particular working group. 
>> 
>> Documents, no matter how clearly written, produced by an individual 
>> working group, no matter the level of subject matter expertise, can 
>> benefit from careful review by experts who have expertise outside the 
>> scope of the people participating in the working group.
>> 
>> When I was an AD (a rather long time ago now) I saw many documents 
>> where inadequate attention had been paid to security, congestion control, 
>> manageability, etc.
>> 
>> i.e., it is not sufficient to say, as has been said during this thread, that the 
>> onus should fall on a working group chair to ensure the quality of the 
>> documents that are produced by a working group, the best documents 
>> can be made better, in terms of being used on the Internet, by the 
>> cross-area review done by the IESG.  
>> 
>> Scott
> 





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