There's really nothing as awesome as sending Last Call comments on your own
draft. You should try it some time ... or not.
But please see below.
On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 5:53 PM, The IESG <iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
the following document:
- 'Increasing the Number of Area Directors in an IETF Area'
<draft-dawkins-iesg-one-or-more-04.txt> as Best Current Practice
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by 2015-01-05. Exceptionally, comments
may be
sent to iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
I had a chat with Scott Bradner today, and Scott asked me to explain some
history in a different way. The text he questioned was this:
OLD
In the distant past, all IETF Areas had a single Area Director. The
movement from single Area Directors in an Area to pairs of Area
Directors in most Areas happened over a period of years (for
reference, see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/past-members.html), as part
of the IESG organizing itself to do the work the IESG is chartered to
do.
END
Scott said that changes in the number of Area Directors assigned to a given
Area during "the modern era", post Kobe, wasn't quite the linear
progression I described, and suggested (my words, trying to capture his
thoughts), something more like this:
NEW
While it's true that recent IESGs have had two Area Directors in each Area
except for the General Area, the number of Area Directors in each Area has
varied since https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1396.txt (for reference, see
http://www.ietf.org/iesg/past-members.html).
This variation was due to a number of factors, including workload and
personal preferences, and happened as a natural part of the IESG organizing
itself to do the work the IESG is chartered to do.
At one point, the IESG placed three Area Directors in a single Area (Scott
Bradner, Deirdre Kostick, and Michael O'Dell, in the Operational &
Management Requirements Area, between IETF 36 and IETF 37 in 1996).
END
I wouldn't mind hearing people's opinions about making this change as part
of Last Call, and I don't think the rest of the IESG would mind, either ...
Thanks!
Spencer
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 file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawkins-iesg-one-or-more/
IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawkins-iesg-one-or-more/ballot/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.