Hi Barry,
Thank you for the fast response and addressing the comments.
Have a nice day,
Ines.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 5:13 PM Barry Leiba <barryleiba@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Thanks for your review, Ines. Reasonable comments, and we'll consider
them as we go into IESG Evaluation. (On comment 3, I'm just going to
make the necessary change myself, and remove the CREF, so it's moot.)
Barry
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 8:35 AM Ines Robles via Datatracker
<noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review result: Ready with Nits
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
>
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Document: draft-iesg-nomcom-eligibility-2020-01
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review Date: 2020-04-30
> IETF LC End Date: 2020-04-30
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary:
>
> This document provides a one-time interpretation of the eligibility rules (BCP
> 10) that is required for the exceptional situation of the cancellation of the
> in-person IETF 107 meeting. This document only affects the seating of the
> 2020-2021 NomCom and any rules that relate to NomCom eligibility or process
> before IETF 108, and does not set a precedent for the future.
>
> The document is clear and well written. Please find some comments below.
>
> Major issues: Not found
> Minor issues: Not found
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Some comments/questions:
>
> 1- It would be nice to add a reference here
>
> Section 1:
>
> "...resulting in its conversion to a limited-agenda virtual meeting, with remote
> participation only.":
>
> e.g. [IETF 107 Virtual] =
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-announce/Gqc4-GIsnvccObQrrciL_Vm0HMU/
>
> 2- Should this clarification be added?
>
> " ...before IETF 108..." --> "...before IETF 108 (virtual or in-person
> meeting)..." e.g. in the introduction or in section 3.
>
> 3- Related to this comment
> [https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/kHVPn0tyF5o4Rvd3aZ51JA2MDtU/]
>
> "... In section 2, last paragraph, I suggest changing the CREF to, "Note: The
> previous two sentences will be replaced before publication with, 'This document
> contains the outcome of that discussion.'...."
>
> Should this suggestion be applied?
>
> Note that CREF2 mentions "the previous sentence", not "the previous two
> sentences...."
>
> 4- It would be nice to add a reference to eligibility-discuss mailing list/
> draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand
>
> Section 3:
>
> "...as there will be time for proper community work on such an update..."
>
> Thus, e.g. "...community work on such an update (e.g. efforts such as
> [Eligibility-discuss-ml] and [Eligibility-criteria])"
>
> [Eligibility-discuss-ml]=
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/eligibility-discuss/
> [Eligibility-criteria]=
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand/
>
> Thank you for this document,
>
> Ines.
>
>
>
-- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
