Subject: RE: Voting (again)

From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:36:13 -0700

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On 

> > The only way to releive work is to distribute it, not 
> concentrate it.
> 
> False.  You can also relieve work while keeping throughput 
> constant by reducing overhead.  
> 
> Distributing work often reduces throughput by creating more 
> overhead. Only a few applications are embarassingly parallel 
> -  most do not scale well as the number of PEs is increased.

Keith is absolutely right here. If you give the job of reviewing
documents to 20 people instead of 5 you have just quadrupled the amount
of work. 

The way to reduce work is by subsidiarity - devolve decision making to
the lowest possible level.

Adding people to a committee does not help, decentralization of decision
making does.

>  Nobody else gets to concurrently 
> see the problems that exist at every level of the protocol stack. 

Plenty of people outside the IETF do, they are known as users, also
ISPS, researchers etc.

There are several issues such as security which do cut across the whole
stack. I don't claim that every Internet problem is a security problem
but most of the urgent ones are.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:26:27 +0200

>the lowest possible level.

Unfortunately this is not possible. Subsidiairity means the active (if 
necessary) respect of the duties of others to their own constituents. In 
this case a WG Chair's constituents are not the members of his group (as 
you seem to imply). The constituents of all the members of every WG are the 
users and the system these users trust. This is because this is the Charter 
of the IETF.

Subsidiarity to apply in this case would call for all the IETF Members to 
share the same vision of the Internet - this could result from a common 
model of the network - what is not the case (or there would be no problem). 
The network model is replaced by the non documented vision of the AD and 
IESG Members.

This explains why IETF is better suited to maintain systems (as everyone 
can observe them and get a similar understanding) rather then innovating or 
creating. Innovation is delegated to IAB or considered as a long range 
issue for the IRTF.

jfc