IETF Logo Mail Archive

WGs/AD [IETF areas re-organisation steps]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 26 December 2014 19:40 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCAA21AC412 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:40:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
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 mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id by9k94Qx_mKM for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:40:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-x22a.google.com (mail-pd0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 709DC1AC3ED for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:40:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f170.google.com with SMTP id v10so13480011pde.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:40:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=oXrjNwPdJsc6BpSqcBgGXublQ2J7YeuBTyHaGlt99Z4=; b=GGmexiohsmfyAQVfFsAg401DbuzLDkX2fzZ2Yny6nvkE8OqPqfdpklPtMb2GGPVVQv vn4D0G1UPaf8CM0JaocGGHyPt4g3AyBFSlXGZR62jfqSwABTAM+LBhjUIxNxKAIsaxgi pt3lZmGftR+Q+D/SSEyA9Y7E4RuxM++JIrEZ7k7r28rhQdAUOUW4AKAcDMbf4N5Zusry 5QROT7NgwjIxahfeSRoSiyzdCO6OA2AXhV34EwbmyA3zw5gUbthaPMK7HExFqsRSGMdU epfh/lbCt5DhtMFK84sGBW5Hvcg4BzSR/7sZFKoePZRiggrR8nw5+3uwHeGmu0eEk5DQ Vp2Q==
X-Received: by 10.66.159.164 with SMTP id xd4mr71435344pab.54.1419622814561; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:40:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:4072:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:4072:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nj2sm28961714pbc.16.2014.12.26.11.40.11 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Dec 2014 11:40:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <549DB9A6.4050506@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 08:40:22 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
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
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
Subject: WGs/AD [IETF areas re-organisation steps]
References: <ED473823-2B1E-4431-8B42-393D20BA72DF@piuha.net> <7973.1419613616@sandelman.ca> <CAG4d1rcXa10moh7-V2oteV+3o8y0s+QwCTXaCWt5aBeRdPKv=A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rcXa10moh7-V2oteV+3o8y0s+QwCTXaCWt5aBeRdPKv=A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nM7FwahViHjIs3kxdxS2NVHypOc
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, IETF-Discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 19:40:16 -0000

On 27/12/2014 06:46, Alia Atlas wrote:
...
>> I'm a little bit surprised that the RTG area load has gone up like this,
>> and so quickly.  Is it the various SDN things that are pushing this, or is it
>> that the RTG area currently has the most enthusiasm for YANG work?
>>
> 
> It's a mixture of things combined with RTG already being at the very top edge
> of workload.  In RTG we have/will have about 21 active WGs; if we add a
> third routing AD,
> then RTG will absorb 3 WGs from INT.  Granted that one is not active and may
> be merged in, we are still looking at about 23 WGs for RTG with a more
> average load being about 8 WGs/AD.

So let's be frank about this. Today (excluding the General Area AD
with his crippling load of 1 WG) we have 129 WGs for 14 Ads,
which is 9.2 WGs/AD. That is clearly too many, so should there
be a target ratio and a plan for reaching it?

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email