On 11/8/19 2:22 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
And again - this is all procedural, no change to IETF rules is needed. I begin to realise that the IESG's workload is in its own hands, and we (all of us who've served in the IESG over the last 20 years) have to share the blame for current practice.
Something I realized long ago is that IETF community expectations are at least as influential as the rules, probably moreso.
As long as the community expects that any working group that has support will be approved, that working groups can stay alive as long as they keep producing documents, and that any document that a working group produces should be approved, the workload problems will continue no matter how IESG manages its own process.
And every time someone points out that IESG is overloaded, most of the proposed "solutions" seem to have the intent, or at least effect, of further reducing document quality.
Maybe it's just me, but I keep thinking that the best way for IETF to serve the Internet is to produce fewer documents of higher quality and greater relevance.
Keith
