Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Tue, 05 November 2019 18:49 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDBBA120142 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 10:49:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=7n/3OAd2; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=VMNcy4gz
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5NYz8Hx-gD5w for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 10:49:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECFA2120116 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 10:49:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 64152 invoked from network); 5 Nov 2019 18:49:41 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fa96.5dc1c445.k1911; i=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=mraTgRLX7Nn2k/O+dOvnmtmYkZpu495oUSx1oKOhYCM=; b=7n/3OAd2+sUnoyyX+4H3FHTNX8Isk9izez9eC3cjeCc5iFnZOlnPCa9WpIMH94+Fidir6VQyhK7aj1SjxzeM9jMDHSxVMhP5I2zbOG1P/NF3+r3huYdaqLnHSEeM7rVk+nvu+UZulfYthM4NVhPYZ/2JGuMYjsFvgrhittpeCAHcpSUVzpDpWB6YqrFaW53loXPjCXovVjLnG+Q9C5mXBqE+NL8+kAVXnwjiG22mzCjXBs5HuahfA0+wGIMgblvO
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fa96.5dc1c445.k1911; olt=printer-iecc.com@submit.iecc.com; bh=mraTgRLX7Nn2k/O+dOvnmtmYkZpu495oUSx1oKOhYCM=; b=VMNcy4gzyqOwQmODVj6aC4xX2g/vjrdqlHhwkTTmAHAB4s5v4UqE9ULWyfmVMt/CtW29t07Ps8ozeCLM3560szSg4vyDMtHmR5ZDNhfXOpVC8WY+Cdt6LgNMU6PTUBidClr1BcCLZBFuyt9LpABWu8hVrIUUCmdQ/pZv35ybP4U+e3xdgyHoz3K+zkGYNu/gPI+I+L9vqvCKZTPkgz9Uh3Vf12hIfvHH9U27/YRzURV5yM1i0uddQGgTKyJOrSGd
Received: from ary.local ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPSA (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD, printer@iecc.com) via TCP6; 05 Nov 2019 18:49:41 -0000
Received: by ary.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id DF6AEE6A701; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 13:49:40 -0500 (EST)
Date: 5 Nov 2019 13:49:40 -0500
Message-Id: <20191105184940.DF6AEE6A701@ary.local>
From: "John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback
In-Reply-To: <7601008E-0E4A-42DD-9D5D-667A7603CE38@akamai.com>
Organization: Taughannock Networks
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/0zBZ6XQWoAh-URZjfifcePPpSIQ>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 18:49:48 -0000

In article <7601008E-0E4A-42DD-9D5D-667A7603CE38@akamai.com>; you write:
>Far from it. If the job is too big (so that only full-sponsored people can be IESG members), then the choice is remove some of the work or add more people. 

I wouldn't think that adding people would help much since a lot of the
work isn't divisible.  ADs traditionally read all of the drafts, not
just the ones in their area.  I suppose we might say that if there are
three or four ADs in an area, pick two or three at random for each
drafts, but there's a lot of other places where all the ADs are
involved.  The number of communication paths grows as the square of
the number of people.
 
The way to have less work is to publish fewer RFCs, or perhaps shorter
RFCs.  We might, for example, revisit our policy of not doing
versioned RFCs, and see if there's a way to do minor revisions without
having to reopen the rest of a document.

R's,
John