" Each IETF area is managed by one or more Area Directors (ADs)."
I don't object to the flexibility that this change provides.
However, I do remember being very concerned when RAI was created
that the resulting increase would make the IESG unwieldy and
less efficient (for example, by increasing the number of DISCUSS
ballots to be cleared up; by making discussions of the obvious
take longer; and so on). Which did, in fact, happen.
So I would like to see some sort of aspirational statement in the
draft that the total size of the IESG should be kept as small as
possible. The current 15 (+5 liaison/ex officio) is already
too big IMNSHO.
Regards
Brian
On 25/10/2014 03:04, internet-drafts(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Increasing the Number of Area Directors in an IETF
Area
Author : Spencer Dawkins
Filename : draft-dawkins-iesg-one-or-more-00.txt
Pages : 4
Date : 2014-10-24
Abstract:
This document removes a limit on the number of Area Directors who
manage an Area in the definition of "IETF Area". This document
updates RFC 2026 (BCP 9) and RFC 2418 (BCP 25).
The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawkins-iesg-one-or-more/
There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dawkins-iesg-one-or-more-00
Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
I-D-Announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt