View source for IAB Review of Proposed WG Charters

During BoF reviews and WG charter reviews, the IAB has opportunities to provide feedback. This list compiles some areas that the IAB can focus on to provide feedback, and questions that can be asked during review.

This list should be considered as a potentially helpful checklist to ensure that reviewers check for some potentially relevant areas. It is not a requirement list or a new "architectural considerations" section for charters.

== Internet health ==

* Does this proposal continue to uphold or improve the general aspects of Internet health, e.g., perform congestion avoidance, etc.
* Does this proposal cause any issues with other protocols or functions in the Internet, and have those effects been considered?

== Deployment incentives ==

* Does this proposal promote the interests of end users? See also RFC 8890.
* Does the proposal have a realistic chance of being deployed, e.g.,  have suitable deployment incentives?
* Does this proposal risk favoring or incentivizing centralized deployments in a way that could harm users? And if so, are there any changes to the proposal that would make it work better?
* Does this proposal have support of a wide number of entities, or does it represent a few proponents?

== Security & Privacy ==

* Does this proposal impact pervasive surveillance issues, and are they appropriately taken into account in the charter? See also RFC 7624 (pervasive surveillance).
* Does this proposal risk opening up new privacy vulnerabilities? And if so, are there any changes to the proposal that would improve its privacy properties? See also RFC 6973 (privacy considerations).
* Are there any new denial-of-service concerns?

== Protocol evolution ==

* Does this proposal build on existing protocols to extend or revise them, or does it create something entirely new?
* Does this proposal create a foundation for work to extend it in the future? How will active use of that extensibility be  encouraged?
* RFC 8546 (wire image), RFC 8558 (path signals), use-it-or-lose-it

== Ecosystem ==

* Does the proposal fit within the general scope of IETF? Have the necessary collaborations to other organisations been considered?

== Review Assignments ==

* APN: Mirja Kühlewind (2022-09)
* SCITT: Deborah Brungard (2022-09)
* SNAC: Wes Hardaker (2022-09)
* UUIDREV: Jari Arkko (2022-08)
* MOQ: Zhenbin Li (2022-08)
* ELEGY: Cullen Jennings (2022-08)
* TIGRESS: Mallory Knodel (2022-06)
* SAVNET: Jiankang Yao (2022-05)
* PPM: Russ White (2022-02)