Thanks again for all your hard work in doing the reviews. They make it possible for me to concentrate on reviewing just those documents where there are problems or I have deeper expertise. And the quality of the protocol specifications coming out of the IETF is obviously very important, particularly for protocols that are gaining significant use.
As you may have seen, the IESG and the community has been wondering if there'd be something that we could do about the IETF process, in the sense that there's quite many things happening at the very end of the document's life cycle. This results in some surprises, and often also moves some important decisions out of the working group and to author/shepherd/AD hands. A while ago we met for the IESG retreat and wanted to experiment with three specific changes: - sending work back to the WGs when significant changes are needed, and making the WG the central place of the edits - moving some directorate reviews earlier, without impact reviewer effort too much - inviting some of the shepherds onto tele chats I am writing to you in order to discuss the second item. How big of a change would it be to have Gen-ART reviews be invoked during WGLC, while the documents are still in the working groups? The goal of the reviews would still be the same, e.g., I would be checking that the reviews were positive and/or that the issues brought up have been properly addressed. There are important details to consider, however, and I would like to get your feedback on how you would seem them having an effect, and what would be the best way to organise this, if we decide to go ahead with the change for the Gen-ART. Triggering the review would have to be done by something else than IETF last call announcement. Is the best approach is to have the WG chairs manually request for this? Note that sometimes there are multiple WGLCs. I presume that it would be preferable to have a Gen-ART review be done only once at this stage, as otherwise the work load would increase. The chairs may have some idea of whether they are likely to need another WGLC before they start one. There may be possibly bigger changes and time lag between the first Gen-ART review and the one that checks that the changes are ok. Some specs may not make it through WGLC, and a review at that stage may increase the effort you guys are putting in, by reviewing those specs that will fail. Jari _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
