| Internet-Draft | More Area Directors in an Area | January 2015 |
| Dawkins | Expires 4 August 2015 | [Page] |
This document removes a limit on the number of Area Directors who manage an Area in the definition of "IETF Area". This document updates RFC 2026 (BCP 9) and RFC 2418 (BCP 25).¶
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.¶
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 July 2015.¶
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.¶
This document updates RFC 2026 ([RFC2026], BCP 9) to remove a limit on the number of Area Directors who manage an Area in the definition of "IETF Area". This document also updates RFC 2418 ([RFC2418], BCP 25) to reflect this updated definition.¶
The change described in this document is intended to allow the IESG additional flexibility in organizing the IETF's work. It does not make any changes to the role of an Area, and does not argue that assigning more than two Area Directors to an Area is an optimal solution in the long run. In particular, this change is not intended to increase the size of the IESG significantly. If several Areas will require more than two Area Directors, the IESG should consider investigating alternative ways of organizing the IETF's work.¶
In recent discussions, the IESG has explored splitting and combining Areas. One proposal resulted in a single Area that would be managed by three Area Directors.¶
An Area managed by three Area Directors conflicts with this definition in Section 14, "DEFINITIONS OF TERMS" of RFC 2026 ([RFC2026]):¶
A similar statement appears in Section 1, "Introduction" of RFC 2418 ([RFC2418]):¶
While it's true that recent IESGs have had two Area Directors in each Area except for the General Area, the number of Area Directors in each Area has varied since RFC 1396 ([RFC1396]) (for reference, see http://www.ietf.org/iesg/past-members.html).¶
This variation was due to a number of factors, including workload and personal preferences, and happened as a natural part of the IESG organizing itself to do the work the IESG is chartered to do.¶
At one point, the IESG placed three Area Directors in a single Area (Scott Bradner, Deirdre Kostick, and Michael O'Dell, in the Operational & Management Requirements Area, between IETF 36 and IETF 37 in 1996).¶
The last time the IESG increased the number of Area Directors in an Area was when they requested that the Nominating Committee provide a second Area Director in the Routing Area in 1999. Although the number of Area Directors in an Area hasn't changed since then, the IESG continues to be responsible for specifying the positions that Nomcom would fill each year.¶
It is consistent with the IESG's role in creating and dismantling entire Areas to allow the IESG flexibility in assigning enough Area Directors who have been selected by the Nominating Committee to effectively manage the working groups within an Area.¶
Note the requirement in RFC 7437 ([RFC7437], BCP 10) that the Nominating Committee review (approximately) half the positions for the IESG each year is unchanged. The Nomcom may assign an appropriate term duration for each position to ensure the ideal application of this rule in the future, and this is also unchanged.¶
For this text (OLD) in Section 14, "DEFINITIONS OF TERMS" of RFC 2026 ([RFC2026]):¶
Replace with this text (NEW):¶
For this text (OLD) in Section 1, "Introduction" of RFC 2418 ([RFC2418]):¶
Replace with this text (NEW):¶
Informational RFCs such as RFC 3710 ([RFC3710]) and informal descriptions of IETF organizational structure which also describe IETF Areas as being managed by one or two Area Directors should be considered updated by this normative specification.¶
This document updates an IETF process BCP and has no direct Internet security implications.¶
This document makes no requests of IANA, and the RFC Editor can safely remove this section during publication.¶
Thanks to Barry Leiba and Jari Arkko for applying the giggle test to version -00 of this document, and to Adrian Farrel, Alexey Melnikov, Brian Carpenter, Christer Holmberg, David Crocker, David Harrington, Donald Eastlake, Kathleen Moriarty, Murray Kucherawy, Susan Hares, Stephan Farrell, and Stuart Bryant for providing review comments.¶
Thanks to Fred Baker, Michael St. Johns, and Scott Bradner for providing a better understanding of the history of how the IESG ended up with two Area Directors in most Areas and even, at one point, three Area Directors in one Area.¶