Re: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process

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

 



On May 1, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Scott Brim <swb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Let's rename "last call" to
> something like "IETF review" and stop giving people the wrong
> expectations.  Review outside the WG is vital, can be done repeatedly,
> and must be done by the whole IETF at least once.

Yup.   The term "last call" is traditional, and I feel a bit of attachment to it, but I think your observation here is exactly correct: we ought not to think of the IETF last call as the end of the process.

However, that is a bit of a problem, because I think it's fairly rare for documents to get additional "review" at last call time.   Changing the name probably won't fix that.






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