Subject: [MEXT] Moving forward with MEXT documents

From: marcelo bagnulo braun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:29:28 +0200

Hi,

At this point in time, the WG has the following documents that are ready 
for WGLC:

draft-ietf-mext-firewall-admin-00           
draft-ietf-mext-firewall-vendor-00          
draft-ietf-mip6-hareliability-04        
draft-ietf-monami6-mipv6-analysis-05         
draft-ietf-monami6-multihoming-motivation-scenario-03

And the following document that we need to ask for adoption:

draft-premec-mext-extended-home-link-01

According to our new ground rules, each of these documents to proceed 
will need 5 thorough reviews. Since this is a considerable amount of 
effort from the WG, we would like soem feedback on how to manage this 
effort. In particular, we would like to get feedback from the WG about 
which documents should we issue the WGLC or adoption call first and if 
possible volunteers to do the reviews for the documents.

We will receive input on this till the 3rd of may and then decide how to 
move forward.

Regards, marcelo

---

From: "QIU Ying" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 16:22:05 +0800

Hi, Marcelo

Please see my 2 cents inline.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "marcelo bagnulo braun" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 11:29 PM

> Hi,
>
> At this point in time, the WG has the following documents that are 
> ready for WGLC:
>

As regards these 2 firewall drafts, they are the products of the design 
team of 9 persons. I am sure that all these 9 persons know the documents 
very well due to a lot of discussions between them via email, phone 
meeting and face to face. Since only 4 names are listed as editors at 
each document, the other 5 persons could be considered as the thorough 
reviewers . Moreover, at the Philadelphia meeting, the mext attendees 
were given 10 minus specially to read the 2 documents throughly. Hence 
more people should understand the documents very well.

> possible volunteers to do the reviews for the documents.

Regarding the documents processing in future, IMHO, we may require the 
authors to collect and edit all of comments from emails and discussion 
at the IETF meeting, and then ask the related providers of these 
comments (at least from 5 individuals) to endorse neatened reviews. 
Finally, push back the document with the neatened review to the WG to 
vote. I thought it could reduce the amount of review effort 
significantly.

Regards
Qiu Ying

>
> We will receive input on this till the 3rd of may and then decide how 
> to move forward.
>
> Regards, marcelo
>
>

Institute for Infocomm Research disclaimer:  "This email is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify us immediately. Please do not copy or use it for any purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you."