Re: Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-forces-mib-07

[Julian Reschke <julian.reschke at gmx.de>]

Pasi.Eronen at nokia.com wrote:
> Olaf Kolkman rote:
> 
>> Personally I would like to see that whatever document enters into
>> the RFC-Production function (to use the terminology from the RFC
>> Editor model[*]) has a clean copy in the repository. That allows for
>> a very clean interface between the streams and the RFC-producer. So,
>> I would argue that the result of (iv) is always posted.
> 
> Based on my (quite short) experience as AD so far, it seems document
> authors vary greatly in how fast they can update the document and
> submit it (once the text has been agreed).
> 
> I've seen this done in less than 10 minutes (sometimes before the
> IESG telechat ended). I've seen cases where it has taken several 
> months. In cases where the time is measured in weeks (relatively
> common) or months (fortunately rare), just sending the RFC Editor 
> note (and not waiting for updated clean copy) saves time, especially 
> considering that the RFC Editor processes documents quite fast
> nowadays.
> ...

I'm tempted to say that if it takes the authors months to update the 
document with the suggested change, then, well, a publication delay of 
several months is what they deserve :-).

BR, Julian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf