Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 03:43:25PM +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
(1) It is hard to "fire" WG chairs - they are often friends and
colleagues. Unfortunately, many stay on when their job responsibilities
have changed and they can no longer dedicate the necessary time.
Solution: Institute WG chair term limits of (say) one or two years.
That way, there is an expectation of change and the possibility for
more people to prove themselves. With two chairs, staggering terms
ensures continuity.
I hope you don't mean a term limit. Making chair appointments annually
renewable might work - but limiting the pool of talent by imposing
term limits would be self-inflicted damage, IMHO.
How about limiting the term of working groups, instead? If a working
group stretches beyond about 2 years, there is a lot of value in
limiting its scope, shunting new work/extensions into a new working
group or groups, and trying to shut it down in the next 12-18 months.
Very much a case of YMMV, I think. But if a WG's milestones have to keep
being extended for no good reason, that should be a red flag.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf