Definition of power and responsibility [Re: Delegation of power(wasRE: Section 2.4 ofdraft-ietf-problem-statement-00.txt)]

[James Kempf]

John, Brian,

I agree with this analysis, but I think you may be missing one point in EKR's
postings.

In addition to agreeing about who has authority/responsiblity for what in the
current organizational structure, there is the open question about whether the
current organizational structure is sufficient for the current situation. There
have been some proposals for a more formal intermediary level between IESG and
WG chairs, with a discussion of their attendant drawbacks.

Do we want to completely rule out this possibility due to the drawbacks?

            jak

----- Original Message -----
From: <john.loughney at nokia.com>
To: <brian at hursley.ibm.com>; <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 2:53 AM
Subject: RE: Definition of power and responsibility [Re: Delegation of
power(wasRE: Section 2.4 ofdraft-ietf-problem-statement-00.txt)]


> Hi Brian,
>
> I agree with you in principle, but I think the paragraph below
> looks like solutions work.
>
> > So, can we stop talking about either excessive concentration
> > of power, or about delegation, and start talking about the need
> > for clear definitions of what powers and responsibilities the
> > IETF grants to *each* level in our structure?
>
> What I propose is:
>
>  I think we should document in the problem statement that is
>  a perceived concentration of power (or lack of delegation of
>  power) with, perhaps, some short text about effects of such
>  a feeling.  I think that this is good to document, without
>  finger pointing.
>
>  Second, I think that there needs to be documentation to the effect
>  that definitions about the powers & responsibilities of different
>  parts of the IETF (IAB, IESG, WG chairs, individual participants)
>  are unclear.
>
> I think if we can clarify some of these issues, we may be along
> a path of improving the IETF.
>
> br,
> John
>
>