On 2011-09-28 08:03, John C Klensin wrote: <snip> > ... Interesting it is exactly the > assumption that the IAB Chair will have first hand involvement > in everything that the IAB does that is cited an example of why > it is necessary to have the IAB Chair on the IASA. So, if the > IAB succeeds in reducing the load on the IAB Chair in that way, > the argument for forcing the IAB Chair to serve on the IAOC and > Trust is reduced as well.
I agree, and of course this goes with my bias against the IAB becoming the I Administration B, which imnsho is a slippery slope that we are already on. > > I'd also like to see mechanisms explored within the IESG to > reduce the load on the IETF Chair. I agree with this phrasing. If Russ isn't too busy (joke), an update of draft-carpenter-ietf-chair-tasks might be of interest, especially http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-ietf-chair-tasks-00#section-5 > To the extent to which being > General Area AD adds significant work, I'd be happy to see that > turned into a "real" area and handed off to someone else. I'm > not even sure that it is critical that the IETF Chair take a > lead (and voting) technical role in the IESG; Indeed. In the above draft I also distinguished the IETF Chair role from the IESG Chair role, and whether they can be split is worth a discussion. > perhaps the > community should reevaluate the required skill set and determine > whether that responsibility (which, of course, includes > responsibility for document reviews, etc.) is really an optimal > use of time and skills or whether we should eliminate it and > look for a different balance of skills. I'm not recommending > that -- I can see large disadvantages as well as advantages -- > but I think it is within the range of options the community > should understand and consider. > >> If we (the community) are going to solve the I* overload >> problem, it would be good to have some actual data on how the >> I* chairs spend their time. It would be good to have a better >> understanding of the problem before proposing solutions. > > Yes. And a better understanding of how all sorts of people > spend their time, if it could actually be obtained, would be > helpful for all sorts of purposes (e.g,, I'm sure Nomcoms would > love to know for priority-setting purposes in candidate > selection)). But, having sat in one of those seats and had an > up-close view of how several others have handled them, I think > one of the things you would find is that each person who does > those jobs sorts things out, and prioritizes them, a little bit > differently (maybe a lot differently). From that perspective, > the observation that we've got the current IETF Chair and the > current and immediate past IAB Chairs, supporting this change > ought to send a relatively strong message... And to be clear, I (still the previous IETF Chair) think that some such change is needed, which is exactly why I wrote the above draft in 2006. Perhaps the difference is that I see the IAOC/Trust role as very hard to separate from the IETF Chair role - but more easily separable from the IESG Chair role. > unless, again, > efficiency of the IASA is more important than efficiency of the > IAB or IESG (and I want to stress that I don't think you have > said that... if it just my inference about whether some of your > arguments lead if carried to their logical conclusion). I think we need all three to be equally efficient; before IASA existed, we had burning administrative problems. I wouldn't like to have to rank the importance of the three. Brian _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
