Hi Lakshminath,
The end result is that we have documents in the RFC Ed queue with
another document in the wings called draft-blah-clarifications
I'm plotting the growth rate of draft-blah-clarifications, and my
current estimate
is that it will exceed the size of draft-blah-original before
draft-blah-original
becomes an RFC.
(But we are in deep trouble if the only part of the organization that does
reviews is the IESG.)
I am curious about the scheduling issues. If the IESG job is a
"full-time" job, why can't the people on IESG find time to meet with
each other, f2f or in telecons; perhaps someone will help me
understand that. The other issue that comes up is time zones. We've
had this in the Nomcom and I found out recently that telecons at odd
hours is the norm if you work in some SDOs. I think these should be
non-issues really.
Perhaps the IESG job description should say in part, "you are expected
to work some 35-40 hours a week on IESG stuff, should keep your
calendar open in the months of ... for a retreat, and should be able
to participate in telecons at odd hours." If you remove IESG from
that sentence, it probably is already in many IETFers' job descriptions.
This isn't a comment on the scaling issue (I think it needs to be
considered)
but I'm a bit surprised that the above isn't already a part of the job
description... The Internet is important, and we should not treat the
management of its technical direction as a hobby that you do on
top of your day-time job. Maybe in some special cases, but not as
general rule.
--Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf