Re: [Icar] Thoughts on ICAR direction

[Alex Rousskov <rousskov at measurement-factory.com>]

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> > (1) Document cross-area review criteria.  This would help to 
> > educate authors and ad hoc early reviewers in what to look for.
> >
> > (2) Develop a process for WG chairs to use existing area review 
> > resources (MIB Doctors, GEN-ART, Security directorate, Ops 
> > directorate, etc.) to get early review for their documents?  Maybe 
> > this could be a proposed "July 14" experiment?
>
> These are both good suggestions. I wonder if the charter of the 
> TOOLs effort can be twisted a bit to host this work. It's 
> interesting that we've had two damp squibs (SIRs and now apparently 
> ICAR) but MIB doctoring, GEN-ART etc seem to be working nicely.

I agree that the Tools team can document interfaces and/or suggest 
tools to support review processes (e.g., solicitation, archival, and 
linking of reviews). However, it looks like Mark is doing a "good 
enough" job already, and we would need more data/experience to design 
something more permanent.

On the other hand, I would not task the Tools team to document review 
criteria or to develop solicitation process for Chairs. Doing that 
seems too far from the current Tools charter.

Alex.

P.S. I am speaking as a Tools team member, but do not claim to 
represent team's position.

_______________________________________________
Icar mailing list
Icar at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar