Re: [apps-review] Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team

John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com> Sun, 20 March 2011 22:08 UTC

Return-Path: <klensin@jck.com>
X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02683A6BEE for <apps-review@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.634
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.634 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.035, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DXRwZXmsPm-t for <apps-review@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bs.jck.com (ns.jck.com [209.187.148.211]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 063D33A6BED for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:08:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=localhost) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Q1Qof-000KlM-Ek; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 18:09:41 -0400
X-Vipre-Scanned: 049D83B600223D049D8503-TDI
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 18:09:40 -0400
From: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
To: SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-ID: <7AE95D9A5FCB3646106E712E@[192.168.1.128]>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20110320113434.0c1626b8@elandnews.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110318165117.0d43e6e0@elandnews.com> <4D861898.2040101@isode.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20110320113434.0c1626b8@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, apps-review@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-review] Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team
X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Apps Area Review List <apps-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 22:08:21 -0000

--On Sunday, March 20, 2011 13:08 -0700 SM
<sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

> One suggested change that has not be discussed is the Team
> Lead.  The Team Lead should have a good relationship with the
> Apps Area ADs as he or she works under their direction.
> Keeping a Team Lead for too long does not ensure continuity.
> I would like the team to discuss with the Apps Area ADs when
> they meet in person about:
> 
>   (i)   Should the Team Lead be selected for a year only
> 
>   (ii)  Should the Team Lead have IESG experience to provide
> better guidance to reviewers

One comment on that question: one of the things the IETF does
much less well than it should is to arrange things that
familiarize new people with how the system works and generally
to do leadership development.  While one might gain something in
efficiency by having a team lead who was a former AD, it would
be _far_ better, IMO, to use the position as an opportunity for
increased understanding of the community, actors, and dynamics
(as I am sure it has been for you).   As long as things are
fairly open, there will always be present and ex-ADs ready to
step in and provide that sort of guidance, perhaps even when the
team lead doesn't want it :-).  But let's not throw away the
opportunity to read more people in on the system in order to
gain small marginal efficiencies by reusing the same folks over
and over again.

    john