Subject: [Gen-art] GENART review of Definitions of Managed Objects for FCIP

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 12:56:55 +0200

Hi all,

Here is my GENART review of Definitions of Managed Objects for FCIP.
See footer for info about Gen-ART if you are confused.

This document is basically ready, except for 2 nits.  Note that I am not
a FC nor a MIB expert, so I am assuming the MIB doctors did their job &
the WG did their job as well.

1) Please expand FCIP (and FC) in the title & abstract. Its hard to keep
track of all of the acronyms in the IETF.
2) Subsections in Section 2 need a blank line between the subsection
title & the text.

I would imagine that there might be comments during IESG review, so I'd
suggest the authors wait until there are additional IESG reviews before
reving the document.

thanks,
John

============

Q: What is Gen-ART?
A: The General Area Review Team. They provide gneralist reviews for the
General Area director (currently Brian Carpenter), providing an
additional set of eyes for documents as they are being considered for
publication.

Q: Who is Gen-ART?
A: The current membership list is maintained at
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/reviewer-list.html. We do accept
new reviewers - volunteers should contact the Gen-ART secretary (see
below) < NOTE that this phrasing is Brian's, but the URL actually says
"contact the General Area director" - we just need to say the same thing
in both places>

Q: What does the Gen-ART secretary do and how do I find him/her?
A: The Gen-ART secretary is also listed on the membership page. The
Gen-ART secretary tracks documents submitted for publication and assigns
them to reviewers, and collects the reviews, posting them to
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art.html.

Q: Why is my document being reviewed?
A: Two possible answers - most Gen-ART reviews are now assigned at IETF
Last Call time (answer #1). If a document is revised after IETF Last
Call, or is processed so quickly that no Gen-ART reviewer has been
assigned, it's reviewed after being placed on the IESG Telechat agenda
(answer #2).

Q: How was my Gen-ART reviewer selected?
A: There is a mechanism, but it's more about leveling the review
workload than selecting reviewers based on topic areas. Gen-ART
reviewers are generalists, so we think this is OK.

Q: Are the reviews public or private?
A: The reviews are sent to the Gen-ART mailing list (which includes the
General Area director). Ordinarily, copies are sent to shepherding ADs,
document shepherds, working group chairs, and authors/editors, but the
archives are publically viewable, at
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/current/index.html.

Q: Are Gen-ART comments binding?
A: Not unless the General Area director agrees with the comments.
Gen-ART does not have a formal role in the standards approval process -
we're simply providing input for the General Area director who is
deciding how to ballot the document. If the General Area director agrees
with a serious concern expressed in a Gen-ART review, the General Area
director may ask the Gen-ART reviewer, "does the new version of the
draft address your concerns?"

Q: I have comments from a Gen-ART reviewer - do I revise the document
immediately?
A: Ask your AD/document shepherd. Practice varies between areas. A fair
number of comments area resolved with Notes to the RFC Editor. But the
General Area director will not ask for a respin before a telechat.

Q: What if the Gen-ART reviewer is just flat wrong?
A: The General Area director understands that these are reviews by
generalists who are not experts in every protocol the IETF works on,
plus security and MIBs. If you disagree with comments, say so. The
ballot position is called "DISCUSS", not "IMPERIAL EDICT" or
"BLACKMAIL".

Q: Is there any written Gen-ART procedure?
A: Currently
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-doria-genart-experience-01.txt
,
and - guess what - we're still reviewing it :-) 

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art