Re: [Pesci-discuss] Question: stability of IAB

There's probably need for some improvements in
the IAB's area. I'd like to see more focus on
achitectural guidance.

However, we should be careful in not attempting
to change too many variables at the same time.
A priority order is needed. The community can
only focus enough to get through a limited set
of improvements per year. We need to choose those
with the best bang for the buck ratio. I think the most
important task, administrative restructuring, was already
accomplished and this is a good base to continue
other tasks. Many IESG-process improvements (e.g.
individual submissions, tracker) have also been executed
with a noticeable effect. My personal favorite next
issues to focus on include WG/document process
improvements, RFC Editor process, and structure
of areas. A couple of years ago IANA was on my
list too, but the situation may now be better (?).
Another issue that I'd like to see get continued
attention is openess of various processes, e.g. nomcom.
I don't think IETF chair issue belongs to the list of
most critical items (Brian seems to be doing fine
here...). I agree that IRTF, IASA, IAD, IAOC, ISOC
should not be under major revision now.

--Jari

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss