Re: AD Time

Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx> · Wed, 25 Jul 2018 10:20:14 +0100



    Exactly

    
    - Stewart

    
    On 25/07/2018 04:53, Ted Lemon wrote:

    
      The problem with review teams is that if you don't
        read the documents and don't know what they are about, you don't
        have the overview that allows for synthesis.   One of the
        advantages of having people who review "all" the documents is
        that stuff occurs to those people because they see connections
        that people who don't review "all" the documents don't get.   I
        put "all" in quotes because it's never really all, but even so,
        ADs definitely have a bird's eye view that is not shared by
        anyone else.
      

        On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 11:21 PM, Brian
          E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx>
          wrote:

          On
            25/07/2018 01:41, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:

            .....

            > I think that as AD my time was consumed
              because I made a point of reading,

              > or at least skimming, all drafts prior to publication
              looking for security

              > specific issues.

              
            So would things be better if we formalized the area
            review teams so

            that they perform this function directly and can officially
            register "No

            Objection" in the IESG ballot, with the AD only being
            involved when the

            suggested ballot is "Yes", "Discuss" or "Abstain"?

            
            (We've been talking about AD overload for >10 years, so
            maybe it's

            time to actually change something.)

            
                    Brian