Re: PROTO Process

[Henk Uijterwaal <henk at ripe.net>]

Jari,

> In my experience, the part of PROTO that is currently working is the 
> write-ups.

Perhaps, though for the 6 to 10 notes that I've written, I cannot recall
any question or feedback on them.

> When it comes to the shepherding of the document through 
> issues raised in last call, directorate, and IESG reviews, the authors 
> and the responsible/discussing ADs seem to be most active in responding, 
> explaining, suggesting text changes, etc. There are notable exceptions 
> -- you know who you are -- but in many cases the shepherds are 
> relatively silent. Is this a correct perception of the reality? And if 
> it is, is it a desirable state of affairs or something that should be 
> changed?

Most, if not all, issues that I see raised are detailed questions on
the contents of the document where the authors are probably in the
best position to answer them.  These questions are sent to the authors
directly, I don't see what the sheperd can add here other than monitoring
that the authors respond within a reasonable timeframe.

Henk

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Henk Uijterwaal                           Email: henk.uijterwaal(at)ripe.net
RIPE Network Coordination Centre          http://www.amsterdamned.org/~henk
P.O.Box 10096          Singel 258         Phone: +31.20.5354414
1001 EB Amsterdam      1016 AB Amsterdam  Fax: +31.20.5354445
The Netherlands        The Netherlands    Mobile: +31.6.55861746
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Belgium: an unsolvable problem, discussed in endless meetings, with no
         hope for a solution, where everybody still lives happily.