[rfc-i] draft-iab-ise-model-03 comments
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,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest