Re: Review panel's role

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

 



In message <00a101c598fe$b02fb980$c51eff56@DFNJGL21>, "Spencer Dawkins" writes:
>Hi, Pekka,
>
>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.
>

I think the detailed minutes will clarify this, but there's no one 
answer.  

Often, the DISCUSSing AD will clear a DISCUSS offline, in which case 
things proceed on request of the sponsoring AD.  This is often the case 
for relatively simple issues, especially when dealt with promptly.

If a document takes a while to come back, or if the changes are 
complex, it can be returned to the agenda so that the changes can be, 
well, discussed.  Maybe the objecting AD isn't happy enough, but the 
sponsoring AD thinks they might be persuadable by the other ADs.  
That's been known to happen.  A document with multiple substantive 
DISCUSSes often comes back, because the changes can be interdependent.

Finally -- and this is painful -- sometimes the objecting AD doesn't 
respond to private requests to clear a DISCUSS.  Putting the document 
on the agenda is a forcing function.  This last one shouldn't happen, 
but it does.

		--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb



_______________________________________________

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]