--On onsdag, oktober 20, 2004 09:31:06 +0100 Colin Perkins <csp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:that was what the procedure used to be - and someone had to keep track
of the pile of I-D submissions for which there was no response (yet)
from the WG chair. That extra load is what the secretariat has been
trying to avoid during the rush.
Can't we just require the working group chairs to send approvals before
the submission deadline? Much of the problem before was that there was no
definite cut-off date for approvals.
when was "before"?
there's been definite cut-off dates for approvals for at least 3 years (see the deadline announcement messages).
(I think the secretariat has accepted some late approvals, though...)
Checking back, I see you're right about the approval deadlines, although if I remember correctly the deadlines were a lot less firm in the past.
The main issue, though, is that having the approval deadline a week before the submission deadline causes problems, as John enumerated in his "rant". In an ideal world, authors would know the drafts they were planning to submit in plenty of time, and they'd tell the working group chairs so approval can be given. In practice, and despite several reminders sent to the working group lists, I've seen several cases where the early approval deadline caused drafts to be rejected. That doesn't help the IETF process.
Colin
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf