Jari, On Sep 19, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
> Bob, > > I appreciate your view on this, particularly when you are day-to-day seeing > how the current system works with IAOC. Thanks. I also note that several past IAOC chairs have expressed concern about this proposal as well. That should be given some weight. > > That being said, I do think it is important to give some flexibility to > chairs on organizing their work. And it is important to provide tools for > them to manage their time, including ability to delegate some tasks. For sure, but why only address this aspect of their jobs? We should be talking about the general problem before evaluating a point solution. We don't normally take this approach when chartering working groups, their usually has to be a discussion of the problems before proposing specific solutions. > > I understand the point about chairs being involved. But I'm also sure there > will never be an IAB/IETF chair who would ignore important IAOC business. > This draft is about the ability (but not a requirement) of the chairs to > delegate most of the day-to-day business and just stay on for the important > stuff. One practical issue is that if the chairs under today's rules would > stay out of the day-to-day business, that would mean missing one voting > member. I'm not sure that is desirable either, and I really don't think you > want to force them to be in every meeting. I don't think it so easy to distinguish between "important IAOC business" vs. "day to day". "Day to day" decisions can have unexpected consequences. It's just not that black and white. Also, different chairs get involved in different things. The IETF chair is very involved in tools, secretariat related issues, venues, the IAB chair is involved in RFC editor related issues, the ISOC CEO is very involved in the budget. It's not all the same. Their involvement varies a lot depending on the topic and their role. The proposal treats them all the same. > > I also understand the point about chairs sharing the responsibility for > decisions. I just don't think the suggested new scheme would affect that. The > IAOC would for sure still listen to a message from the chairs very carefully. > And if you are in any board with multiple people having voting power, if the > rest of the board ignores your opinion it really doesn't matter if you lost > by 1-9 or by 0-9... (and again, any of the chairs would for sure still be > behind the decisions anyway.) Having a vote is very different from just being an advisor. I also think that over time, the chairs will become less involved in the IAOC because they are busy. It doesn't make sense to me to say on one hand that the chairs are too busy to be voting members of the IAOC, but at the same time they will have enough time to effect important decisions. It doesn't work that way in practice. Bob _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
