A 100.000 foot perspective on "what is the problem"

[James Kempf]

Dave,


> Why?  How does it affect the problems this discussion is trying to consider?
> How would it change the basic mandate to produce architectural guidance the
> IAB is already pursuing?
>

Because it could make some place in the standardization process that is
semi-formal for such guidance, rather than on an ad hoc, exceptional basis as is
currently the case. That might help tamp down WG objections when IAB oversight
is requested by the IESG, and it might help encourage ADs to involve the IAB on
small architectural issues, when appropriate, rather than just on large
architectural issues such as OPES. RFC 2850 contains three specific activities
in which the IAB performs architectural oversight:

    1) Assists the IESG in assessing BOFs,
    2) Sponsors and organizes the IRTF,
    3) Convenes workshops to review architectural issues.

RFC 2850 says nothing about IAB architectural oversight of working group
activity after it is underway.

                    jak