Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications and Infrastucture Area
David Kessens <david.kessens@nokia.com> Wed, 21 September 2005 00:02 UTC
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EHs4A-0005QY-KN; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:02:26 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EHs48-0005QT-Ng for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:02:24 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA15728 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:02:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mgw-ext01.nokia.com ([131.228.20.93]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EHsA3-0007eR-L7 for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 20:08:32 -0400
Received: from esebh107.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh107.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.143]) by mgw-ext01.nokia.com (Switch-3.1.7/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id j8L02LG4021889 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 03:02:22 +0300
Received: from esebh003.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.82]) by esebh107.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 21 Sep 2005 03:02:22 +0300
Received: from dadhcp-172019068136.americas.nokia.com ([10.241.58.151]) by esebh003.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Wed, 21 Sep 2005 03:02:21 +0300
Received: from dadhcp-172019068136.americas.nokia.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by dadhcp-172019068136.americas.nokia.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j8L02Si3008282 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:02:29 -0700
Received: (from david@localhost) by dadhcp-172019068136.americas.nokia.com (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) id j8L02RIc008281 for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:02:27 -0700
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 17:02:25 -0700
From: David Kessens <david.kessens@nokia.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20050921000225.GD6496@nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2005 00:02:21.0990 (UTC) FILETIME=[BD68B460:01C5BE3F]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 0fa76816851382eb71b0a882ccdc29ac
Subject: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications and Infrastucture Area
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
I am very worried about the discussion on the new proposed area. Most mails are along the line that it sounds "nice" to have a new area formed. Forming a new area comes at a cost for the IETF, while there are also potential benefits. I believe it is very important for the community to consider and understand the costs versus the benefits for the creation of a new area. As for the benefits, I see that we would give more well deserved attention to an important area of work within the IETF. In addition, it should help to alleviate overload within the transport area. However, there are also many costs associated with this proposal, among others: - we need two more people out of the community who are going to spend a lot of their time on the administrative side of our organization instead of producing real work for the IETF. - the nomcom will need to do more work to appoint more ADs. - IETF documents will receive more scrutiny in the IESG. While this could be considered a good thing, there has been a significant amount of backlash in the community that enough is enough. I for one believe that we currently already provide enough review, and possibly already too much. - Management research has shown that optimal group sizes are in general quite a bit smaller than the current IESG. In fact, I see already significant strains within the IESG due to our group size. For example, we have a hard time to find a time, date and location for our retreats that work for all of our members. The definition of "A hard time" is that we spend significant amount of time trying to find a date and time that works for all of us. Other examples in terms of meetings where we all have to attend is a conference call regarding an appeal. We spend time on checking out who is actually present during an IESG call. We have issues with conference calls where somebody causes an echo on the conference system. The more people attend, the more time it takes to debug the problem. We send mail among each other, the more members we have the more mail we will receive and the more time we will need to read and respond to IESG internal mails. The more we specialize the function of areas, the more inter-area coordination will be needed. We have discussions about drafts and many other issues during the telechats, the more people we have the more time we will spend on these discussions. Adding two more ADs has the potential to make this quite a bit worse as our group size is already in the territory of too large to operate efficiently. Two more ADs will bring us yet another step closer to the tipping point of where we will only be busy among ourselves instead of serving the community. I guess it comes as no surprise that I have serious issues with this proposal. While the idea sounds nice, the operational details will cause us more pain than it provides benefits. An IESG that doesn't operate efficiently is not in the benefit of the IETF. I believe that many of the benefits of a new area can be had without adding a new area. Alternatives could be to create a special attention area towards Real Time Applications within the Application area with one of the two ADs in the Applications area specializing on such applications. Another approach could be to do serious surgery on how the IESG operates to make it a more scalable group. I believe it is very dangerous to add an area before addressing the issues associated with a larger IESG as it will get ever harder to make such changes while our group grows less efficient by piecemeal fixes instead of looking at the larger issue of how the IESG as a whole can become more efficient to the benefit of the IETF. David Kessens --- _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- RE: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Yaakov Stein
- Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications and In… David Kessens
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Lakshminath Dondeti
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… John C Klensin
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Spencer Dawkins
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Dave Crocker
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Scott Bradner
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… David Kessens
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… David Kessens
- RE: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Yaakov Stein
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Melinda Shore
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Thomas Narten
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… James M. Polk
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… David Kessens
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Margaret Wasserman
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… C Wegrzyn
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Melinda Shore
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- RE: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Nicholas Staff
- Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit of … Pekka Nikander
- RE: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Yaakov Stein
- Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Margaret Wasserman
- Re: Cost vs. Benefit of Real-Time Applications an… Jari Arkko
- Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit… Sam Hartman
- Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit… Pekka Nikander
- Re: Adding parallelism? (was Re: Cost vs. Benefit… Brian E Carpenter