Re: Appointment of a Transport Area Director

Martin Stiemerling <martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu> Tue, 05 March 2013 11:22 UTC

Return-Path: <Martin.Stiemerling@neclab.eu>
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 E3B9F21F88F1; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 03:22:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.766
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.766 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.167, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r9pQUrbz90uK; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 03:22:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CEAF21F88A0; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 03:22:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F684103563; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:22:23 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de)
Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VUBiVV6NnSpb; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:22:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ENCELADUS.office.hd (enceladus.office.hd [192.168.24.52]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81015103562; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:22:03 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.7.0.105] (10.7.0.105) by skoll.office.hd (192.168.125.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 12:21:33 +0100
Message-ID: <5135D55A.7040208@neclab.eu>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 12:22:02 +0100
From: Martin Stiemerling <martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130221 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Appointment of a Transport Area Director
References: <21B86E13-B8DA-4119-BBB1-B5EE6D2B5C1D@ietf.org> <51330179.3040500@gmail.com> <919840EE-BEC8-4F82-8D3C-B116698A4262@gmx.net> <1D88E6E9-33DE-4C4D-89F4-B0B762155D6F@standardstrack.com> <D4D47BCFFE5A004F95D707546AC0D7E91F77BA46@SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <51335FAC.2000305@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <51335FAC.2000305@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.7.0.105]
Cc: IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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 Mar 2013 11:22:25 -0000

Brian,

On 03/03/2013 03:35 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Lars,
>
> Let's try that statement parametrised:
>
> "*Someone* on the IESG needs to understand X."
>
> I think there are many plausible values of X, certainly including
> congestion control. But what do we do when, for some value of X,
> there is no such AD?
>
> What I'm getting at is that this line of argument doesn't scale.
> The only solution I see is to replace it by
> "Several people on the Y Directorate need to understand X."
>
> That probably does scale. Of course, it implies that ADs consult
> and trust the relevant Directorate.

Even if the directorate is doing all of its reviews there is still 
plenty of follow-ups to be done by the responsible ADs, e.g., discussing 
with the draft authors on how to address the comments, check the updated 
drafts, discuss with the IESG about this, etc.

This won't go away, even if the directorate is reviewing each and every 
draft.

   Martin

>
> Regards
>     Brian
>
> On 03/03/2013 12:50, Eggert, Lars wrote:
>> On Mar 3, 2013, at 13:37, Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> wrote:
>>> There are two other interpretations of this situation, neither of which I think is true, but we should consider the possibility. The first is the TSV is too narrow a field to support an area director and as such should be folded in with another area. The second is if all of the qualified people have moved on and no one is interested in building the expertise the IESG feels is lacking, then industry and academia have voted with their feet: the TSV is irrelevant and should be closed.
>>>
>>> Since I believe neither is the case, it sounds like the IESG requirements are too tight.
>>
>> I don't believe the requirements are too tight. *Someone* one the IESG needs to understand congestion control.
>>
>> The likely possibility is that many qualified people failed to get sufficient employer support to be able to volunteer. It's at least a 50% time committment.
>>
>> Lars.
>>

-- 
martin.stiemerling@neclab.eu

NEC Laboratories Europe
NEC Europe Limited
Registered Office:
Athene, Odyssey Business Park, West End  Road, London, HA4 6QE, GB
Registered in England 2832014