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

[john.loughney at nokia.com]

Margaret,

A short reply:

> BTW, I don't believe that we should "dilute" the power of the IESG.
> _Someone_ has to do the things that the IESG is doing.  I do think
> that it might be reasonable to spread that power over a larger group
> of people, or over more than one group (side-by-side, or in layers).
> But, some group _has_ to have ultimate authority over what does and
> doesn't get published on the standards track.  And, some group (not
> necessarily the same group) has to have authority over the process
> (most notably the ability to start and stop WGs, agree to WG charter
> changes, etc.).  I, personally, think that there would be benefits
> to having the process management done in a separate group from the
> quality assurance, but other clearly think otherwise.

My general feeling is that there is a scaling problem with the IESG
at the moment.  If 'dilute' = 'distribute', then I am all for dilution.
There needs to be quality control, of course, but, for example, if WG
Chairs made it their responsibility to ensure quality documents got 
to the IESG, then some amount of the IESG's responsibilities could
be lightened.

John