Section 2.4 of draft-ietf-problem-statement-00.txt

RJ Atkinson rja at
Fri Feb 28 08:40:13 CET 2003

For what its worth, I disagree with Brian about Section 2.4.

I'm on the IAB (until I escape next month) and have had similar
visibility into things (caveat: IAB chair sits on IESG telechats,
so Brian has done that and I haven't).  I've also been a WG Chair
whose had trouble advancing documents (OTP WG) in the past.

Brian's comments *presume* that the solution is IESG delegation,
whereas the existing text says that the problem is concentration.

I agree that the problem is concentration (among other things,
many former and some current IESG folks say it creates too much
workload for the IESG members).

Delegation by IESG is one possible fix.
Redistributing responsibility is another possible fix.
Other potential fixes likely also exist.

I don't want to presume any particular fix, just note that too
much workload in one place is currently a problem.  In effect,
we have an existence proof that the current organisational schema
does not scale in practice.

So I very much like the current text.


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list