Sloppy Charters (was: Re: Discipline of Internet Protocol Engineering)

[john.loughney at nokia.com]

John,

> While I fully agree, I think that, in this area and several 
> others, we've set up the wrong incentive structure.  When we 
> have tight charters, they are often, perhaps typically, not 
> enforced.  When an AD enforces one --with regard to benchmarks, 
> scope, or procedure-- he or she usually becomes _really_ 
> unpopular with the membership of the relevant WG... and most of 
> the rest of the community, at best, ignores the action.

This sounds much more like a breakdown in the communication
between the chair and the AD.  If the chair is not able to 
organize the WG / charter correctly, so that the AD has to
step in, I am not suprised that the WG revolts.  

Currently, the chair - AD communication seems to be suffering.
I am not so sure how it is in other areas, but I sense that 
ADs are not giving sufficient technical direction to their
WGs.  I, for one, would be happy to have more discussions
with the IESG on the future of my WG, in fact, I think I
need more.

John L.