Subject: RE: Schedule for -00 WG drafts

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (LU/EAB)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 09:34:13 +0100

> > I've been using an alternate procedure:
> > 
> > - Author sends in draft, CCs me
> > - I follow up immediately with an approval to
> >    the ID publisher
> > 
> > No need for extra publisher->me->publisher round trip, no
> > chance for me to screw up draft formatting with an
> > extra forwarding hop.
> 
> I also prefer this mechanism; I guess we would need a timer 
> associated, however.  If the draft editor doesn't hear from
> the chair within 2 working days, the draft is dropped.

Yes, there should be a timer. For -00 submissions prior to a
meeting, would it not make sense to just require chair
approval before the ordinary draft deadline. I have thought
the special (one week earlier) deadline for -00 drafts was
because of the need for WG chairs approval, are there other
reasons??

/L-E

---

From: "Theodore Ts'o" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 04:51:31 -0500

> because of the need for WG chairs approval, are there other

That's more or less what we have now, so when the chair might not be
awake 5am before the deadline, the chairs have to send the preapproval
list to the secretariat.  Harald was trying to see if we could somehow
streamline the process.

The other reason for the one week earlier deadline is to give people a
chance to read the document before the IETF meeting.  The presumption
is that it takes longer to read a brand-new document for the first
time than to fire up wdiff and look at the differences between the -02
and -03 versions of some document.  So the goal is to get the actual
document into the hands of the working group members so they have a
chance to review it.  Hence, the requirement that the -00 documents
actually get *approved* before the one-week earlier deadline.

							- Ted

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:44:36 +0100

All,

I've said this before and did not get that much response.
Understanding the need for the secretariat to smooth the
process and the need for planning, nevertheless the pre-approval
is not aligned with how at least some working group works.

In my cases the decision whether to send a pre-approval or not
is extremely close to the decission to approve a document being
published as a working grup document, it might have to do with
reviewing how certain issues has been solved, comments on the
list has been addressed, etc. Point is that there is often much
churn just when we decide to make it a wg doc.

Now what Harald suggest is reasonalbe, anything that a working group
chair claims in a mail to "Internet-Drafts to be a working group
document(pre-approved or not) and included in that same mail
becomes published as wg doc. Saves me the problem on what I get
on the pre-approval list and makes it possible to assist
in-experienced authors in an efficient way.

Have anyone thought about why there are so many individual -09 versions
published just before the cut-off, and so many wg -00 versions
published just after the meetings, when everything that happend in the
meeting was that the authors said that "Yeah - we taken care of all
comments, doc will published as a wg doc shortly".

Too much process??

/Loa

-- 
Loa Andersson

Principal Networking Architect
Acreo AB                           phone:  +46 8 632 77 14
Isafjordsgatan 22                  mobile: +46 739 81 21 64
Kista, Sweden                      email:  [email-masked]
                                            [email-masked]

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 11:56:19 +0100

> comments, doc will published as a wg doc shortly".

<provocation style="deliberate">

Homework done too late?

>From the actions of many I-D authors, one would think that the 46 weeks of 
the year that are NOT 1 week before a deadline did not exist.....

</provocation>

---

From: Bill Fenner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 2004 09:24:40 -0800

>chance to read the document before the IETF meeting.

The last time we discussed this on wgchairs, that idea was loudly
trounced - the assertion was that individual -00s have new ideas and
wg -00s don't (since they come from an individual draft that's been
discussed and accepted as a wg document).

  Bill