Complex Problems

john.loughney at john.loughney at
Thu Jan 9 07:18:21 CET 2003

Hi John,

> FWIW, there is no requirement anywhere that the ADs, or even WG
> Chairs, be the front line of the liaison (or education process).
> They may have concluded that it is more efficient for them to
> take these roles on themselves, and may even be right.   But, if
> it is an important source of IESG overload, and results in
> things that are more important not getting done in a timely
> fashion, then we are suffering from bad allocation of time and
> resources in the management process.   And structural changes
> are neither necessary nor sufficient to solve those sorts of
> problems... the relevant ADs and WG Chairs just need to learn to
> involve others and delegate responsibility.

I agree.
> If we don't have sufficient depth in these areas to permit that,
> then we are either doing a very poor job of leadership
> development (which I believe to be generally true, but it is
> probably a separate issue) or it is questionable whether the
> IETF really has sufficient expertise to be the core locus for
> the work.

I also agree on this point too.  I would not object to having
more architectural discussions during face-to-face meetings and
involvement of IETF-elders in day-to-day activities.  I think
we need to pass the community wisdom around a bit better than
what we are doing - which I think is what Spencer was talking
about a few days ago.


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list