Re: [arch-d] Call for Feedback on the new proposed structure for Technical Programs and Administrative Support Groups

Hi, Mirja, and the IAB,

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:47 AM Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> The IAB has been working on refactoring its programs. You can find the
> proposed description of the new structure and procedures on Github [1]. The
> aim of this effort is to increase transparency, visibility, and openness of
> the architectural work done by the IAB.
>
> In analysing the current IAB programs, the IAB identified two kinds of
> programs which are quite different in their needs and goals. Therefore, the
> new structure proposes to separate today’s IAB programs into Technical
> Programs and Administrative Support Groups.
>
> Technical Programs are more short-lived activities (even though this might
> be longer than one IAB cycle) and focus on specific technical or
> architectural issues that require both input from experts as well as
> community discussion. Current Technical Programs are model-t and EDM.
>
> Administrative Support Groups are long-term activities that help the IAB
> to fulfil their oversight or administrative responsibilities. Based on the
> nature of their task these groups usually consist of a small, dedicated set
> of experts that may have a need to handle matters confidentially.
> Administrative Support Groups are the current technical plenary program,
> the IANA program, and the liaison program. Please note that the IAB is also
> in the progress of reviewing these activities.
>

This roughly makes sense to me, but I would suggest finding another term
beyond "Administrative Support", which seems to collide fabulously with the
use of the word "Administrative" all over the IETF.

I think it's accurate to say that these are "Oversight Groups", each tied
closely to an IAB responsibility in
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2850#section-2.

I'm not wedded to "Oversight", but please don't use "Administrative",
because we'll spend the next decade or two explaining the difference
between these programs and stuff in the IETF.

I'm not sure why the IAB is talking about "Groups" for these instead of
"Programs", which is (I think) an understood-as-IAB term, but I'm assuming
there's a reason, such as the management procedures are different. If
that's not true, "Oversight Programs" would be an improvement.

I know you'll Do The Right Thing, of course.

Best,

Spencer

> RSOC could also be considered as an Administrative Support Group; however,
> given the on-going process in the future RFC editor model program, the IAB
> will not implement any changes or actions on RSOC until this process has
> concluded.
>
> Further, the future RFC editor model program is not considered in this new
> structure. The IAB is not intending to implement any changes or intervene
> in any way with the work of the program.
>
> We believe that this new structure will better support the IAB’s needs and
> hopefully clarify procedures and expectation. Further, we hope that this
> will also help to increase the exchange with the community!
>
> Please provide feedback on this mailing list, on GitHub by raising an
> issue, or directly to the IAB <iab@iab.org>.
>
> Mirja Kühlewind
> IAB chair
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/intarchboard/IAB-programs/blob/master/IAB-programs.md
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture-discuss mailing list
> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
>