[INDEP] Re: Preview of draft-iab-rfc-independent-00.txt

["Olaf M. Kolkman" <olaf at NLnetLabs.nl>]

On 4Mar 2007, at 9:28 AM, Dave Thaler wrote:

> Attached is the current pre-submission version of the document.


> I plan to submit this at approximately midnight PST, and will  
> attempt to
> address any additional issues (or issues I might have missed, if  
> any are
> pointed out) raised prior to then.


> Remaining issues:
>
> 1) Issue "4. Independent publication of documents resulting from IETF
> process" from Olaf's summary.
>
> Olaf proposed no change unless text was contributed.  Jari had
> volunteered to submit some text for this (IANA issues, etc.) which  
> I am
> still waiting for.


Jari submitted that to the list about 30 minutes ago which means your  
submission may have crossed yours :-(.



> 2) There was an apparent contradiction between two paragraphs in the
> text in Olaf's summary of consensus.  Specifically the old sentence:
>
> > Unsolicited reviews will be shared with the
> > author, including the identity of the reviewer.
>
> was contradicted by the newer text in the same section:
>
> > At minimum, the author of every document shall receive a written
> > summary of the review(s).  Reviewer anonymity is discussed in
> > Section 6.

I do not read that as a full contradiction. IMHO section 7 (Nit: in  
the new document the section numbers have changed) is not working  
towards providing anonymity but about working towards making the  
review and the identity of the reviewer public.

> To adhere to the newer consensus regarding anonymity, I have  
> removed the
> first sentence that prevented anonymity, and moved the sentence
> "Unsolicited reviews from parties independent of the author are
> welcome at any time."
> up a few paragraphs to where it flowed better.
>
> I hope this accurately reflects the consensus of this list.

Yes, in my interpretation of the previous section 6 and the current  
section 7, it does.

> 3) There is a normative reference to an Internet Draft dated August  
> 2004
> (rfc2223bis).  I would propose removing the reference to that  
> draft, and
> just referencing RFC 2223.  (The RFC Editor will of course update
> the reference during publication to the most recent RFC at that time.)

Leslie's suggestion that explicitly makes 2223bis a informative ref  
works for me.

> 4) Need to add the "IAB Members at the time of this writing".  Will do
> this before submitting.


I hope you are able to merge in Jari's comments before submissions.

--Olaf

-----------------------------------------------------------
Olaf M. Kolkman
NLnet Labs
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
INDEPENDENT mailing list
INDEPENDENT at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/independent