I've skimmed the recent documents and have come away feeling rather
uninterested in the topic. As with most others, I asume, I'm more interested
in technical work not aministrative or reorg work.
What I assumed would happen is that we would hire a consultant to review
the possible structures for the IETF (we did). Next would be for that
consultant to make a recommendation, get buy-in from the major
stakeholders, then institute the change.
I expect most of us don't understand the nuances of tax exempt status,
(for example) so why are we debating them? I'm not sure that we have the
correct mix of skills to do this particular task & I prefer to spend my effort
on
the technical work.
At the end of the day, any structure we create will have its unintended
consequences that we will need to engineer around. However, the current
process is akin to slowly peeling a band aid off rather than just pulling it
off. Reorgs that I have been involved in that have been long and drawn
out have tended to impact morale negatively.
As this process, starting before Yokohama, has taken so long, my
assumption is that we will be extremely risk adverse when considering
change in the future, as well.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf