Re: Our deadlines are dizzyingly complex and confusing

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

 



Phillip,

> Looks to me as if the cut off is start of business for the RFC Editor.
> That makes sense to me, no matter how much you try to change the cut
> off you can't make it any later than the point where the editor needs
> to start work.

No, the RFC Editor does not edit drafts after the cutoff, they edit
drafts after they have been approved...
 
> I would not mind seeing the -00 cutoff moving to the same as the
> cuttoff for subsequent drafts. At this point we have the automated
> submission tool and the rationale for the difference is removed somewhat.

The rationale for a different cutoffs for -00 and later revisions is
simply that completely new ideas require a lot of time to digest. You
can make modifications still for another week.

(That being said, I've recently run into a few cases where it is not
possible to submit a revised draft to fix an issue raised in IETF LC or
IESG review -- even if the draft in question would not even be discussed
in the upcoming meeting. Our deadline system is a rather crude scheme to
prevent everyone submitting their only updates on the Monday morning of
the IETF.)

> Make the week earlier -00 cutoff apply to manual processing of -00 drafts.

I'd rather just keep both the same. You may have to revert to the manual
submission method if there's some kind of a problem in the tool, for
instance. And I'd rather move into the direction of less deadlines than
more...

Jari


_______________________________________________

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]