Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps

[t.p. <[e-mail]>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Masinter" <[e-mail]>
To: "Yoav Nir" <[e-mail]>
Cc: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 7:24 PM

> > What you are suggesting here is a mini-area with
> > around 5 working groups. Doesn’t this make it worse?
>
> Of current working groups I'd count 9.5, not 5,
> Appsawg .5, Httpbis, Hybi, Json, Urn, Websec, Rtcweb, Webpush, Jose,
Oauth
>
> And perhaps some of OPS work, too.

While a count of WGs is one measure of the load on an AD, another,
suggested by reports from the IESG itself, would be of how many I-Ds are
being handled.  Thus a WG like v6ops, which might have 60 I-Ds on the
go, could be an order of magnituude harder to manage that appsawg, which
limited itself to six.  This could be quantified by running a script
against tools, to list for each WG how many I-Ds it has adopted and how
many others are currently listed as not yet adopted; and a trend of this
over time might be a measure of how well a WG is coping.

The length of time an I-D is in the system would be another measure of
the load on management so another script could measure how many months
it is from the date when an I-D was adopted to the present date, summing
all the values for a given WG.  Again, a trend over time could be a
measure of how well a WG is faring.

Tom Petch




>





>
>