Workload constants [was I-D Action: draft-rsalz-termlimits-00.txt]

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 22-Oct-21 06:43, Barry Leiba wrote:
>> If we think we need more churn in ADs, the solution is some combination
>> of finding/grooming more good candidates and making it easier for people
>> to serve, so that the nomcom has better candidates to choose from.
> 
> I think this is a really key point: I would rather see us put the
> effort into figuring out how to scale the AD job so that more good
> people are willing and able to do it.  I think that's critical to the
> IETF's long-term viability.

This. And responding to another point that Keith made, *why* have there
been approximately 120 active WGs for more than the past ten years? Why
that number, rather than (say) 50 or 250?

Why do we publish about 300 RFCs per year, rather than (say) 100 or 500?
(There seems to be a slight downward trend in that number, but that's
the 20-year average. The average since 1969 is about 170 per year.)

Are these natural constants or what? How many IETF WGs and RFCs does
the Internet really need?

I think we need to understand our own dynamics better before trying to
fix them.

   Brian