[rfc-i] draft-iab-ise-model-03 comments

Ted Hardie ted.ietf at gmail.com
Thu Oct 27 11:12:12 PDT 2011


On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Dave CROCKER <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:
On 10/27/2011 5:30 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> If Abbott and Costello volunteered to act jointly as ISE, with a clear
> indication of how they would self-organize, the IAB might wish to
> appoint them. A carefully placed weasel word such as "normally"
> would make that possible.
>

Ahh.  Now I understand.

Please don't do that.
>
> It's a classic case of thinking that it's important to have flexibility,
> but actually creating a far less stable process.
>
> To give the IAB this flexibility is to then require that when the IAB use
> it they suddenly develop special skills at assessing the likely success of
> this unusual form of management.  (Companies do, sometimes, have
> co-presidents or the like but it's rare that it works all that well.)
>


For what it's worth, I disagree.  At least one team volunteered in the past
for this role and I personally believe that a team could work.  One could
argue pretty cogently that Jon and  Joyce were a team undertaking this role
for the years in which they served (in this and other roles).

I think the IAB would have to be convinced that the team volunteering has a
sensible internal structure or method of apportioning responsibilities.
Saying "may have assistants" implies that at least one team structure is
presumed to work.  I don't think Abbot was Costello's assistant or
Costello's Abbot; having them pretend this was the team structure rather
than exposing the real one to the IAB seems pretty sub-optimal.

Just my two cents,

Ted
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20111027/30b2a644/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list