On 25/07/2018 15:49, Warren Kumari wrote:
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 10:30 AM Kathleen Moriarty
<kathleen.moriarty.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I did like having the context between drafts and across areas. Area reviews were very helpful to clear up issues and also to flag which documents may require more attention.
As a counter example, Stephen Farrell kept up the entire security area on his own while I was on maternity leave, but I think he';s an exception. Every mailing list was followed and all but recent documents were in process.. I did try to have WGs clear their queues in advance as much as possible.
I may have been able to get to 50% with a few changes, but the balance between ADs is a consideration for the NomCom. Benoit & Joel had varying amounts of time to dedicate and they made it work between them.
The role also expands to fill all *available* time -- there are weeks
where all I've done is IESG work, but other weeks (like when I'm at
e.g RIPE and have other things to do) I've managed to get by with just
an hour or two.
Indeed. Same here.
There has been much discussion in this thread about the time required
(as though it is a huge imposition) but very little said about the
rewards --- apart from the satisfaction of doing something useful for
the community[0], you also get to work with smart people, and also are
"forced" to read documents outside your normal / interest zone.
This last one has been really fascinating - before becoming an AD I'd
often stumble across some draft about something like how HIP traverses
NAT and think "Huh, weird. I don't know how that works, I'll read this
draft sometime....", and then forget about it completely / go read
Slashdot instead. Now that I'm expected to read these documents I'm
discovering all sorts of really interesting subjects and details that
I've never known about...
The depth of my knowledge certainly increased since I started on IESG.
For me the job is around 30-40% of full time. The workload in ART is a
bit smaller than in some other areas, but only having 30-40% certainly
makes me pick my battles. This means:
1) I don't read every document. I made a decision few years back that
chances of improving certain documents or chances of me finding serious
bugs in some documents are very slim, so not worth doing. This saves
quite a bit of time.
2) I try not to get sucked into endless debates or volunteer for things
I don't have time to do a reasonable job at. It also means that things
like appeals end up eating into my time that I can spend doing useful
work like helping to progress important documents.
Best Regards,
Alexey
Many (most?!) ADs serve more than one term - if they all felt
overloaded all the time they wouldn't reapply...
W
[0]: or, at least the feeling that you are doing something useful for
the community :-)
On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Exactly
- Stewart
On 25/07/2018 04:53, Ted Lemon wrote:
The problem with review teams is that if you don't read the documents and don't know what they are about, you don't have the overview that allows for synthesis. One of the advantages of having people who review "all" the documents is that stuff occurs to those people because they see connections that people who don't review "all" the documents don't get. I put "all" in quotes because it's never really all, but even so, ADs definitely have a bird's eye view that is not shared by anyone else.
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 25/07/2018 01:41, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
.....
I think that as AD my time was consumed because I made a point of reading,
or at least skimming, all drafts prior to publication looking for security
specific issues.
So would things be better if we formalized the area review teams so
that they perform this function directly and can officially register "No
Objection" in the IESG ballot, with the AD only being involved when the
suggested ballot is "Yes", "Discuss" or "Abstain"?
(We've been talking about AD overload for >10 years, so maybe it's
time to actually change something.)
Brian
--
Best regards,
Kathleen
