> Ned Freed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Like it or not, careful reviews and review checklists, while quited
> > flawed in their own right, are the best tool we have. When I was on
> > the IESG I had my own private review checklist; it was the only
> > thing I found that worked.
> I agree careful reviews are necessary. What I find surprising is your
> logic, which seems to say:
> IANA considerations sections in IDs are not sufficient, therefore
> they are useless (or worse).
I have never said or even implied that.
> Is that really what you are advocating?
Of course not.
> What exactly is it that you
> think should be done (in addition to careful reviews) that would help
> reduce the odds that the careful review find issues with the IANA
> instructions (or lack thereof)?
Simple: The requirement that an IANA considerations section be included in RFC
not containing any IANA actions needs to be dropped. I have been extremely
clear ahout this.
> Note that having IC sections is all about improving the odds that they
> contain the Right Thing before the document is approved by the
> IESG. In my mind that means:
That may be the intent, but the effect is to substitute boilerplate for
review, which won't improve specification quality at all.
> 1) IANA reviews an (essentially) final version, to be sure what it
> says is consistent with their understanding of what needs to be
> carried out. But, IANA does this review during Last Call. Thus, the
> IC section really needs to be complete _before_ the full IETF
> review.
> 2) Well, the Shepherding AD can do the "careful review" during the AD
> review phase, but there is already plenty of pressure to skimp on
> the AD review in order to send a document the WG says is finished
> to IETF LC ASAP. I.e., to get the IETF LC started and "fix any
> issues that come up later". Plus, in my experience, plenty of IC
> issues are caught by ADs other than the shepherding AD. So relying
> on them to catch all such issues is far from ideal.
> 3) Voila, have a checklist item that alerts WGs to things they should
> take steps to make sure their documents have already addressed
> prior to advancing a document out of the WG.
This is all very logical, but we're dealing with people here, not perfect
logical systems.
Ned
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
