Re: AD time

[Charlie Perkins <charles.perkins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello folks,

Please excuse if this is not relevant, or has already been suggested -- 
I didn't read the whole thread!  The heart of my suggestion could be 
summarized as reducing AD workload, but along the way making some 
improvements to the process of document review and progress.  The idea 
is motivated by comparison to IEEE task group management, which seems to 
go more smoothly.

First, I think that the IETF Last Call process is somewhat broken. It's 
not really Last Call; instead, it is an urgent plea for people to read 
the document.  It could be compared to a Letter Ballot in the IEEE.  But 
the implied urgency in the IETF context leads to a sense that the 
document is almost "done", when in fact the document may have major 
issues that need a lot of attention.  Letter Ballot isn't like that.  
All of the comments are tabulated, and subsequent task group meetings 
are dedicated to resolving the comments. Sometimes, there are 
*thousands* of comments (for documents in large task groups like 802.11ax).

Moreover, it sometimes happens in the IETF that WG Last Call ends for a 
document and no one in the working group has read it.  In contrast, at 
least in 802.15 Letter Ballots, it is very very likely that quite a few 
people will read and comment on the document. That's because, 
essentially, they have agreed to make document reviews as part of their 
willingness to participate in 802.15, which could be compared to an Area 
in the IETF (please note this is a very rough comparison).  How could 
the IETF find more assurance that a WG document would get sufficient review?

Perhaps the pool of readers should be identified before the WG adopts 
the document.  If that happened, then when the document is ready for 
wider review, the reviewers are known and have already expressed a 
willingness to review the document.  In the IEEE, the reviewers are 
partially motivated to retain their voting rights, but in the IETF we 
probably wouldn't want to institute such a system as that.  
Nevertheless, having a solid constituency for document review and 
comment resolution in the IETF would help a lot.

My hope would be that, with a better process for document review and 
comment resolution, the ADs would find their job to be a lot easier.

Lastly, I know that some working groups already try to do some of these 
things.  I suggest that we will know when the review process has been 
sufficiently improved, when a document almost never goes through Last 
Call without sufficient comment.

Regards,
Charlie P.