Re: WGs/AD [IETF areas re-organisation steps]

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Sat, 27 December 2014 01:28 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
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 826E01AD448 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:28:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 l6U6g9zUC2AN for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:28:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3AA1A1B10 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 17:28:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E56B2CC5F; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 03:27:59 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rf-XjYGoJysx; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 03:27:58 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2a00:1d50:2::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8407B2CC5D; Sat, 27 Dec 2014 03:27:58 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from jari.arkko@piuha.net)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2060FBC5-0CC3-4ED3-8893-26C61711E1B7"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: WGs/AD [IETF areas re-organisation steps]
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <549DBC61.8020004@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 03:27:55 +0200
Message-Id: <DF715316-FB14-4D1F-905D-FEFFA1C55371@piuha.net>
References: <ED473823-2B1E-4431-8B42-393D20BA72DF@piuha.net> <7973.1419613616@sandelman.ca> <CAG4d1rcXa10moh7-V2oteV+3o8y0s+QwCTXaCWt5aBeRdPKv=A@mail.gmail.com> <549DB9A6.4050506@gmail.com> <549DBC61.8020004@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/tZJavGmu9__6ONHEpfV_Y8GMejU
Cc: 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: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 01:28:03 -0000

For what it is worth, I agree with what Stephen says below:

> I don't think so. There are just huge differences in how different
> WGs impinge on AD workload. I think we should look to try to spot
> any imbalances that exist and adjust where needed. We do that already
> within the SEC area, and ADs in other areas also do, but I don't
> think we can use a number-of-WGs-per-AD metric except as the most
> coarse grained measure. (And the out-of-area AD thing gives us
> another tool to balance workloads.)

Which I think is the point - the proposed re-organisation is largely about the IESG becoming more flexible. We need that flexibility to tune our operations to the current topics today and in the future.

Also, there’s another question about what the proper workload is for an AD, and a third question about ways in which we can move more of the IESG work to WGs. Those are important questions, too, but we still need the flexibility to address topics as they grow and shrink.

Jari