I think this disagreement between two ex-IAB Chairs deserves its own thread.
On 2011-09-21 17:47, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
> On Sep 20, 2011, at 11:09 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
>> ...exactly. I'm far from convinced about that. I think the real need is to
>> figure out how to make the IAOC an Oversight committee rather than it getting
>> involved in executive decisions, and to figure out how to make the IAB an
>> Architecture board instead of getting involved in administrative matters.
>
> On the IAB:
> I do not agree that the focus needs to be on the "A" of architecture. There is not a lot that the IAB does that is not in its charter. I believe that the focus needs to be on the "B" of board. In other words, just as in the IAOC more oversight. During my tenure we took a number of steps to move the handy work into programs and initiatives in which the execution of projects could take place so that the IAB members themselves could oversee but that journey was far from complete.
The tension between Architecture and Board has existed to my
personal knowledge since 1994, and probably longer. Let's not
forget that the IAB has had three names:
1984 Internet Advisory Board
1986 Internet Activities Board
1992 Internet Architecture Board
Maybe it's time to discuss whether the A and the B shouldn't simply
be split apart?
> For the IAOC and IAB these will be difficult challenges that cannot be enforced externally but also need an evolutionary culture change . Not only in the I* bodies themselves but also how the NOMCOM.
Indeed, and I think that is a more profound issue than just the Chairs'
workloads (which, in case it isn't clear, I definitely agree is a problem
that needs solving).
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf