As General Area Director, I am aware of several topics outside
the scope of existing WGs (ipr, newtrk) that appear ready
for attention in the General Area. This message is a summary;
I will follow up with separate messages for each of the
1. IESG structure and charter.
2. WG Procedures.
3. Appeals procedures.
4. Mailing lists management procedures.
We have two ways to tackle these topics. One way is to set up
a WG for each one, with a precise charter. Another way is
to encourage design teams to prepare and submit drafts
for IETF review, and for approval by the IESG as individual
submissions. Experience in the past suggests that the design
team approach may converge faster for process issues, but of
course their output must be subject to open discussion,
four-week IETF Last Call, and ultimately to appeal. However,
it's important to remember that the existence of a design team
gives it no special authority; only IETF consensus can change
the IETF's rules.
I am considering hosting mini-BOFs in a General Area open
meeting at IETF 66 to discuss each of the above topics
and to consider whether a WG or a design team is the best
way forward in each case. For that to be possible, I invite
people willing to do writing and editorial work on the above
topics to contact me in response to my four following messages.
Additionally, Harald Alvestrand has a proposal for an
operational notes series (draft-alvestrand-ipod) and Jim Galvin
is considering a maintenance update of BCP 10 (NomCom procedures).
I would expect these efforts also to be covered in the General Area
Meanwhile, the pesci-discuss(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org list remains open to all
those interested, for general discussion of process change issues.
General Area Director
Ietf mailing list