Re: IONs & discuss criteria

[Ted Hardie <hardie at qualcomm.com>]

At 9:18 PM -0700 3/9/08, Russ Housley wrote:
>
>I really disagree.  Gen-ART Reviews begin this way:
>
>    I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
>    reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
>    _http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html_).
>
>    Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
>    you may receive.
>
>This tells the recipients that the review fits exactly the role you
>describe above.

But your behavior does not tell the recipient that.  If they were
being treated as general Last Call comments, it would be up to
the shepherd and sponsoring AD to resolve them, not up to
the General Area AD.  That leaves one set of people on the hook
for making sure they are done and deciding when they are,
and it is the same set no matter how the Last Call comment
is generated.  Your mechanism privileges one set
over others (in that they are more likely to be held as blocking
until resolved), is likely to be slower (since yet another busy person
must be informed that something is resolved, and may miss it
when it was),  and does not encourage things to push earlier than
Last Call (which is the opportunity I think you're missing).

				Ted Hardie
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf