Re: [arch-d] Program issues (was: Re: IAB report to the community for IETF-109)

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Sun, 15 November 2020 22:30 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A29153A0F0B; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 14:30:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aTyMEnHPj9-w; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 14:30:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.elandsys.com (mx.elandsys.com [162.213.2.210]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01EA63A0F09; Sun, 15 Nov 2020 14:30:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.171.113]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id 0AFMUL4X024973 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 15 Nov 2020 14:30:31 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1605479434; x=1605565834; i=@elandsys.com; bh=zP48vYjjPfdrOKg+ptTCi8Z7W6LkiVWHeKia9JHtGSs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=vVUdp+YDMm7vkPSRMT826x7hohD1NB8ykFj3GL5hAK2gwuKSgmJ1Y7AJds4mAjask zB4UFz4A7jU2jz2+48u1YjllR6UYERMIHPjkRutqtEcRa8kfA8ST2Ip5h+2E0RWKEy NTALQ5sAwPniykCWNh2Ias34x99WkMc4n6TAKd/0=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20201115134439.0aed3670@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 14:29:10 -0800
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, architecture-discuss@iab.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <891AEA3010444F9099444E76@PSB>
References: <1B3F8503-7346-4CBC-8553-140E280ECCA3@iab.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20201115050800.0b08eb08@elandnews.com> <891AEA3010444F9099444E76@PSB>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/rRubdzg47NgSQ2vQ6mtgJxD7KWk>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Program issues (was: Re: IAB report to the community for IETF-109)
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2020 22:30:40 -0000

Hi John,
At 12:29 PM 15-11-2020, John C Klensin wrote:
>I trust you figured out by now that the notice of the report
>contained the wrong link, presumably through the use of a
>template that was not updated.  These things happen although why
>no one on the IAB spotted it might be an interesting question.

Thanks for sharing the correct link.  The two appointments which the 
IAB intends to make is actually for a Board of Trustees instead of a 
Board of Directors.

>However, one additional comment, prompted by your note, below...

Thanks for filling me in on the history.  I interpreted "program" 
slightly differently.

>After almost ten years, the Program model has evolved
>significantly from the original conception.  If that evolution
>has taken us to the point where accountability is a large issue
>--or to where they Program needs "refactoring"-- I wish the IAB
>would address the question of whether, while it seemed like a
>good idea at the time, it just didn't work out and the whole
>idea should be dropped rather than assuming that surrounding it
>with more process and rules would improve things.

Let's assume that the Program model fulfilled its objective over a 
decade ago.  It could do with some rethinking.  I agree with Brian on 
minimizing admin tasks.  It is, in my opinion, not unusual for some 
Programs to fail.  It is useful to understand why instead of shutting 
them done without any explanation.  As a response to 
Bernard's  comment about the "power of the pulpit", I'll pick an idea 
from John, i.e. "the ultimate evaluation of quality would be adoption 
of ideas and topics by the IETF or the broader community.

Representation of interests (re. Bernard's email) tends to be 
complex.  I doubt that it would be doable through a Program.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy