Re: [Icar] A modest proposal for moving forward with ICAR
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Icar] A modest proposal for moving forward with ICAR
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
This has the advantage of doing something now with the resources that
we have now ("contents may settle due to shipping").
Thoughts and comments?
One additional concern on ICAR: if there is no "ICAR manager" (such
that I have been calling for), the likely result is either that the
folks will try to get the reviews from the minority who are known to
produce good (and critical) reviews, or from that class of reviewers,
who are known to not be too critical about their business.
Either way is bad: the first for loading the best reviewers and not
educating the others; the second for not actually delivering a good
review and giving an impression that review has been conducted.
In any case, approaching people 1-on-1 is likely to result in longer
timeouts if the first person(s) don't reply immediately, promise to
review but don't deliver, requiring you to start from scratch, etc.
So, my thoughts are:
1) motivation for being a reviewer is a bit lacking. There was
idea to create yet another 'dot'. Maybe this would be enough. Did
this get dropped? This is probably needed at least after an
experimental phase.
2) an ICAR 'manager' might help in managing the pool, at least at a
later phase.
3) let's try to find a pool of 5-10 people: that should be enough to
bootstrap an experiment with about 2 WGs per major areas (I'd hope).
That said, because I believe this is an important issue, I'm willing
to volunteer though I'm too busy with other IETF activities as it is.
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
_______________________________________________
Icar mailing list
Icar at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar
Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.