ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IAOC: delegating ex-officio responsibility

2011-09-19 16:01:01
Hi Jari,


On 9/19/11 9:36 PM, "Jari Arkko" <jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net> wrote:

Jonne,

First, I want to thank you for the clear expression in Finnish. (Maheeta!
Vaikka näiden muutosten läpivienti alkaa kyllä tuntua siltä kuin jäitä
polttelisi, saa odottaa perse ruvella että kukaan olisi samaa mieltä
mistään, 'kele!) Too bad the English version was not as graphic.

Mun mielestäni tämä homma on menossa väärään suuntaan ja ihan reisille.
Pitää funtsia, mitä ollaan korjaamassa, jottei heitetä lapsia pesuveden
mukana. 

I wish people good luck trying to use machine translate all this..


Anyway, I like your description of the issue and it helps me understand
the concerns. That being said, I could probably construct a similar
argument for all of the bodies that an IETF chair, for instance, has to
attend. Are we really saying that under all circumstances, the chairs
have to attend everything that IAOC deals with? And be voting members?
And if that is too much then the entire IAOC has to delegate more of its
work? Really? And if the chairs have to be voting members in IAOC, why
aren't they voting members in IAB and IESG?

I have some trust in the chairs ability to prioritize, delegate and
engage in the important discussions.

Jari, it is a bit difficult to say what other groups (outside their own)
the I* chairs have to attend. However, I don't think I said people have to
go to every single meeting or be active in everything that IAOC decides to
do. Already when I was in the IAOC, the work was organized (at least
partly) into committees. Not everybody was active in every committee. So,
you don't have to be involved in everything in the IAOC. In addition, you
make it sound like we would have made people be active in the IAOC at gun
point. Those instances were few and far apart!

Actually, already then some things were being delegated. For instance, we
had Greg Kapfer (CFO of ISOC) in the finance committee representing (in a
sense of the word) ISOC.

I want to be very clear: Sometimes it is just fine to delegate work. I
think this is a completely internal matter for the IAOC to think how they
organize themselves as long as the things get done. I actually think they
should delegate more of the operational work!

However, I don't think it is appropriate to delegate responsibility.
Moving the chairs and the CEO/President of ISOC to a non-voting position
is just that.


I do like your idea that IAOC itself needs to work smarter though. It
should really be just a board, not the guys doing the actual work. As an
outsider, it sometimes feels like you guys are doing too much. In any
case, if you and Bob think this would be a good direction for the IAOC to
take, can you comment how feasible it is? Has it been tried, could it be
tried? (And shouldn't it already be done if it was easy?)

Just answering one of your questions above, but I just wanted to tie it to
this thing here as well. You asked if the whole IAOC has to re-prioritize
if the chairs are overwhelmed. I think your question is wrong.
Theoretically, the IAOC should concentrate on doing decisions on the
direction of the administration of the IETF. This means approving the
budget, approving meetings, etc. There are few decisions to be made for
the IETF, but those decisions are extremely important. However, there are
multiple reasons why the IAOC is still very involved in the details.
Partly this is also because the community expects them to be on top of
many details with little importance - even on the frequency and the size
of the cookie service during an IETF meetings. There are other reasons as
well, of course.

Cheers,

Jonne.



Jari

On 19.09.2011 15:35, jonne(_dot_)soininen(_at_)renesasmobile(_dot_)com wrote:
Hi Olaf,

I went through the draft just now, and I have some quite strong feelings
about it. I'm sorry I'm sending my comments so late in the game.

A disclaimer first: I was the chairman of the IAOC some years back, but
I
haven't been actively involved with IETF administration after that.
Therefore, my reactions are based on the history, and I don't
necessarily
have the up-to-date information of today, anymore.

Anyways, I thank Olaf of bringing up this real problem: the IAOC is a
lot
of work measured in time, and effort. At least, when I was there, I
think
it was too much work for people who were already busy in so many other
ways.

However, I think the solution is a bit "menemistä perse edellä puuhun"
(==
putting the cart before the horse): The IAOC should be a _strategic_
body
that gives a direction for the administration of the IETF. Basically
IAOC
is the closest you have to the board of the IETF (financial management,
asset management, management of the operations). Therefore, by design,
you
have the stakeholders represented in the body (the main chairs, the
president and CEO of ISOC).

The Trust on the other hand is everything the IETF has (as ownership -
the
biggest asset the IETF has is of course the community). It owns the
fruits
of the labour of the whole community - the intellectual property that
the
community creates. I think it is very clear that the main stakeholders
(the I* chairs) and the main responsible for the administrator of the
trust (the president/CEO of ISOC) have to be trustees and show ownership
of the trust - you just cannot delegate that.

Like said, I understand the problem: The IAOC is a lot of work for
people
who already have a lot to do. However, I think that problem should be
managed without reducing the oversight of the IETF leadership over the
IETF financials, assents, and other important activities.

Perhaps, the IAOC should think how to reorganize, and strengthen the
operational part of the IETF to reduce the burden of the IAOC. This
might
mean increasing the level of investment to the operations of the IETF to
make sure the IAOC members do not have to be part of the operational
stuff, but can concentrate on making just the strategic decisions and
doing the oversight.

If I would have to summarize this all into one sentence: The workload
problem is a problem only the IAOC can fix, and cannot be done by
reorganizing the IAOC.

Sorry for the long e-mai.

Cheers,

Jonne.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf