[E-impact] Re: Moving draft-various-eimpact-arch-considerations along

[Carlos Pignataro <[e-mail]>]

Suresh,

> On Sep 27, 2025, at 10:53 PM, Suresh Krishnan <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>>    • IAB Report to the Community for IETF 120 (2024-07-19)
>> NOTHING.
>> 
>>    • IAB Report to the Community for IETF 121 (2024-11-01)
>> NOTHING.
>> 
>>    • IAB Report to the Community for IETF 122 (2025-03-13)
>> NOTHING.
>> 
>>    • IAB Report to the Community for IETF 123 (2025-07-18)
>> 
>> NOTHING.
>> 
> 
> The program updates were presented at the iabopen meetings 
> 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/120/session/iabopen
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/121/session/iabopen
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/122/session/iabopen
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/123/session/iabopen

Thank you! — these are well hidden, even for those (somewhat) fluent in IETF handshakes and insider language. 
I am still baffled there has been nothing for the “IAB (to) Report to the Community" for over a year!

That said, for triannual updates on an important IAB Program, there are no eimpact-specific slide-decks — only fragments of a single slide in the “Chair Slides” deck, with bullets of actions more than outcomes or a plan of record. I had higher expectations.

As always, I will read the rest of your email with openness and the time it deserves, and respond as needed; hopefully it adds some real clarity. 

In the meantime, as Alex was seeking for "someone to clarify the role of the IAB program”, and given this thread, my summary:

As a participant (if that is the right term for a Program, or as a “Led" since there are Leads), I found the initial eimpact mailing list (pre-Program) very useful. But building (what seems to be) a makeshift framework — alternating between pretending it functions like a WG when convenient and denying it when not, while preempting work that should have happened earlier in the IETF — has been a major disservice and obstacle to progress.

Best,

Carlos.