Re: Proposed IESG structure change

This is really tempting and has a lot going for it. However, my main concern is 
once we build a bureaucracy, it never goes away. In the case under discussion, 
the Division of Applications would still be with us in 2050 (if the IETF lasted 
that long). So, I think a professional secretariat helping with the technology 
would help in the short term, but will kill the relevance of the IETF in the 
long term.


On Oct 10, 2014, at 4:46 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> 
wrote:
> Let me extend your suggestion in another direction, not to
> support that direction (I have mixed feelings at best) but to
> follow your lead in trying to open up the thinking and
> discussion a bit.
[snip]
> Many other standards bodies have eased the management and
> administrative burdens on volunteer leaders by moving toward
> secretariats (and document editing and production processes)
> that have significant technical skill and that manage much of
> the standardization process other than decisions about creation
> of new groups and projects and determination of consensus.

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail