Two weeks ago, the IESG proposed [1] a merger of parts of the TSV and ART
areas into a new area, and invited community comment.

After consideration of that feedback, the IESG has decided to proceed with
the reorganization with a few tweaks, effective before IETF 119, and will
shortly transmit additional requests to the NomCom.

Briefly, the purposes of this initiative are to (1) eliminate one position
where recruiting is difficult, (2) maintain at least two ADs for each area
except GEN, and (3) avoid increasing the size of the IESG.

== Summary of the Plan ==

The new area will be named “Web and Internet Transport” (WIT). It will
consist of AVTCORE, CDNI, CCWG, CORE, HTTPAPI, HTTPBIS, MASQUE, MOQ, NFSV4,
QUIC, RTCWEB, TAPS, TCPM, TSVAREA (to be renamed), TSVWG (to be renamed),
and WEBTRANS.

The transport area (TSV) will cease to exist. ALTO and IPPM will move to
OPS. DTN will move to INT. SCIM and TIGRESS will move to SEC [2].  All
other working groups will remain in their current area, and ART will
continue to have two ADs.

Future NomComs will be asked to ensure that at least one WIT AD has
expertise in HTTP and related topics, while at least one AD has expertise
in traditional transport-layer topics. Obviously, a candidate may have
expertise in both, and the precise relationship between the two ADs will be
resolved by each pair. Two distinct skill sets are a model successfully
used in the Ops and Management area.

The Transport Area Review Team (TSVART) would not change its purpose,
scope, or operations, but will be renamed, given that there is no more
transport area. One WIT AD would have primary responsibility for managing
this team. The HTTP Directorate would also remain as-is and would be
overseen by the other WIT AD. There are no changes to the ARTART at this
time.

== Next steps ==

In response to feedback, the IESG is deferring the decision of which ART AD
moves to WIT until the new IESG convenes at IETF 119, although Francesca
Palombini remains willing to move. As a result, the ART AD job descriptions
are not changing at this time.

However, the IESG will revise its request to the NomCom to not fill the TSV
AD position currently occupied by Martin Duke. Furthermore, one of the two
open ART positions will change from a two-year to a one-year term to
stagger the positions going forward.

== Summary of feedback ==

This section attempts to categorize the feedback received in response to
[1], with brief responses where appropriate.

= High-order bits =

Web and Transport are a bad fit: Touch, Nottingham

Web and Transport are a good fit: Pauly, Pardue, Baryun, Huitema

IESG: After considering some alternatives, we came to the conclusion that
Web and Transport were a good fit for the reasons the supporters describe.

AD Partnering is not important: Nottingham

AD Partnering is important: Kuhlewind, Baryun

IESG: The current ADs believe having a partner is important. It is
certainly possible to have ad hoc partnerships, but we believe habitual
relationships decrease the cognitive load of the job. Furthermore, the
Ops/Management area is an example of this arrangement working.

This is good overall: Pauly, Blanchet, Swett, Schinazi, Aboba, Black, Zhou,
Bishop, Schwartz

IESG: Thanks for the feedback!

This is fine, but we should think much bigger: S. Farrell, Richardson,
Carpenter

IESG: This does not preclude further work on fundamental changes to the
IESG, though that work will take longer. Moreover, it is reasonable to try
incremental changes to solve problems before trying sweeping ones.

This will waste time and move in the wrong direction: Moore

IESG: We do not believe this is actionable except as a comment opposing
this reorganization.

Integrate with IEEE 802.11 better: Taht

Transfer groups to the W3C: Wood

Remove congestion control as a core competency: Eckert

IESG: We are not considering changes to our relationship with external SDOs
at this time. Furthermore, we believe TCP, QUIC, HTTP, and other protocols
in this area are core competencies of the IETF.

This change is too disruptive right now, and we should think much bigger:
Klensin, and a private responder

It’s too late to start in the 2023-24 cycle: Salz, Hardie

IESG: While this is a reasonable concern, we have been in contact with the
active NomCom chair, with full knowledge of the IETF Chair opening, and
believe our course of action is feasible. Indeed, IETF chair vacancies are
common occurrences.

Look at bluesheets to do area groupings: Gondwana

IESG: This would be an interesting exercise, but we will not block on
someone volunteering to do it. Attendance overlaps are only one
consideration for area assignments.

= Low order bits =

Don’t have a strict line between transport and web: Pauly

IESG: The exact relationship between the WIT ADs will be determined by each
pair, depending on their skills and preferences. The role of this
reorganization is to have clear requests to the NomCom for the collective
skill set of the ADs.

DTN should be in INT: Blanchet

DTN should be in RTG: Touch

IESG: In our view, the case for each area has similar strength, but INT has
more capacity to take another WG.

Form a OAM/Fault Management/Performance WG: Mirsky

IESG: Chartering new WGs is out of scope for this reorganization, but you
are always welcome to suggest a BOF through the usual process.

There should be a report at IETF 120: Baryun

WGs must consent to being moved: Baryun

IESG: RFC2026 leaves the organization of the details of the standards work
in the IETF to the IESG, and that includes assigning WGs to areas.  This
IESG strongly encourages the future IESG to report at IETF 120.


Pick the name carefully: Scharf


IESG: We reconsidered the proposals and settled on WIT instead.


Don’t move an ART AD until after the new IESG is seated: Schwartz

IESG: In response to this suggestion, we will defer this decision (see
above). Francesca remains willing to move if her fellow ART ADs agree.

[1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/iydZ0V3emgjhxVitq_2CGEMo5f8/

[2] Roman Danyliw is already Responsible AD for these working groups.
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

Reply via email to