Out-of-area ADs [Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 26 December 2014 18:51 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 C00801A923C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:51:11 -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 WPTVgrfpXhE1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:51:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-x230.google.com (mail-pa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C1E81A923A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:51:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id rd3so13543078pab.7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:51:09 -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 :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FTpQwtaWCn9MZiHyLjL7nHW1byMMpnqxyj8uvceylS8=; b=ON6BM7RU3rHEL6Pi4KPP0OlW2v96TW08R3Xsn4kAj2aJTHSxWrxOWB1Lc6DK6nCqNm 48NYVQVNEMbBKQOtNmAwXJqR6SNN8ub4aBmEw109DNH7Nf974Cl11uoMlcSk5rASe0oE Qa6uYYDuTUOAeJ6XvgPbC5FIaHAs8ViFIqGzygnhlNKcfGpQ0FBjG+d7ImQ6P4hDGip8 8dHgnEuVSviAgkQzgd7LNovYvIj1wYiKrS/evLa4Gr25smSCtmROhaH0wdmPrEj+vzSE aaksC01BxnFnOMul3E1u0jOa27P/vg5ZU/b9SLUcf/epXF3ATyxqYNtEOW9bBl5jHkm8 MQtg==
X-Received: by 10.66.149.98 with SMTP id tz2mr4314237pab.63.1419619869625; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:51:09 -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 vb4sm29060761pab.19.2014.12.26.10.51.07 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Dec 2014 10:51:08 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <549DAE1C.5080400@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 07:51:08 +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: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Out-of-area ADs [Re: IETF areas re-organisation steps]
References: <5614C286-0CD2-4DAD-A846-510EE38D1B9A@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <5614C286-0CD2-4DAD-A846-510EE38D1B9A@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/ya719vi6T6iHbhsgMIuVIRc3ibk
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 18:51:12 -0000

On 26/12/2014 08:25, IETF Chair wrote:
> The IESG proposes
> to experiment with this approach initially by shifting to out-of-area ADs for
> RADEXT, DIME, LMAP, and ANIMA, perhaps with another few WGs to follow.

I have some doubt whether this approach should ever be considered
normal, rather than exceptional. If it becomes considered normal, it
would imply that our assignment of WGs to Areas, and of ADs to Areas,
are often incorrect.

There is also a practical aspect - meeting scheduling. At the moment,
a rough-and-ready rule is: never schedule more than 2 sessions for the
same Area at the same time, which guarantees that an AD is available
for each sessions. With numerous out-of-area ADs, this aspect of
scheduling will become very complicated.

I have a specific concern about considering an out-of-area AD for
ANIMA. It's a new WG and the current AD invested heavily in the
chartering process. I would be very concerned about changing that
before the WG is well established.

    Brian