Mashing areas [Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps]

Brian E Carpenter <> Fri, 26 December 2014 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4381ACD5C for <>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:25:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1TuCaMqrbfmo for <>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:25:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15ACC1ACD4C for <>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:25:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id v10so13466375pde.1 for <>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:25:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RAjD8QAMI288u6rdlbI7Vq9SFnzJcMkTVeErLKVzyV4=; b=bQrEfGsmtxUiF6G/mMj2CVuZF6qc+QWsp4SZU29WIUsPNmCq37C/iaSYvmZKa9CDi3 CoOoEODeYU1G3k5W61TZOAJqcUkwt/AnP8aRChx015ueVvSe8YBO818eo4LFGbIYar6r 2gVqVWGkmBaUwFAOhcSIERVoxyIMUNzqP5fvKRwu0OwgFnAzuVRhMcyc/86+/Q4loi0H d64gH4mWhDFxJT1qO5EvcVsdiB1QUOsuFVoOHG6fUMrWX/BDky933ihXCEkfBc5l7ocd JBw3zelzccxqO1dffwpL70E9mSVA+dyHIcWJKDeNCr+ytLkCEQnM5B3syj/uQTVLJOwW ClDQ==
X-Received: by with SMTP id k15mr69933262pdj.166.1419621901317; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:25:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:4072:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:4072:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by with ESMTPSA id ak5sm409267pad.44.2014. for <> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:25:00 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 08:25:09 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120428 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Mashing areas [Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps]
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 19:25:03 -0000

On 26/12/2014 08:25, IETF Chair wrote:
> ... the IESG is proposing to merge the APP, RAI, and TSV
> areas into one combined Network Applications (NAPP) area. From March
> 2015-March 2016, this combined area would be overseen by the five remaining
> ADs from APP, RAI, and TSV, with some redistribution of WG shepherding
> responsibilities among them to balance workloads. DISPATCH, TSVWG, and APPSAWG
> would continue to function much as they currently do.

I've been trying to think of a nice way to say this, but there isn't one.

I think this is a terrible idea. It would create a very unwieldy structure,
effectively an IESG within the IESG. It would only take about a week for the
5 ADs concerned to decide that they need weekly coordination meetings; after
a month they'd discover the need for a well-defined chair for those
Depending on the individuals, the result might be a power bloc within the
IESG. Given that there might also be a mini-power bloc formed by 3
Routing ADs,
the dynamics of the IESG would be very different and chairing it could
rather challenging.

I fully appreciate the RAI/Apps issue. There's clear overlap and a lot has
changed since RAI was created. I agree you have to do something there.

However, the merge with Transport is technically strange. Agreed, there
are four or five WGs in Transport that could equally well be in Apps, and
there are some in RAI that could equally well be in Transport. But beyond
that, I just don't see the synergy. (Where we need synergy, we know how
to create it, e.g. the DART WG.) Wouldn't it be better to rebalance by
moving a few groups from RAI to Transport, and the solve the RAI/Apps
problem on its own? (Since I assume that everything is on the table,
there are 2 or 3 Apps WGs that could move to Security, for example.)