Re: Review panel's role

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
I rarely if ever argue with you about protocol stuff, because you're pretty good at protocols, and our process IS a protocol, but I do see "returned to clear DISCUSS" items on the IESG telechat agendas. So, I bet you're right, but there is running code that we actually DO end up sliding to the next telechat, at least some of the time.

FWIW, I've seen this in basically two scenarios:

- the "discussing ADs" have proved to be unresponsive, either in 1) actually (not) dicussing the comment for one reason or another, or 2) verifying that the new version addresses their DISCUSS. The trick of the shepherding AD is to force re-review of the spec by putting it back on the agenda. (This is what I've seen in most cases, and yes, it's a problem -- I've also mailed the IESG about it.)

- the changes have been very extensive (and possibly partially the above in verifying whether they address the issues), and re-reviewing the document at the IESG has been considered appropriate.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]