Subject: Conclusion: Schedule for -00 WG drafts (fwd)

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:52:57 +0100

[this was sent on Friday, but with a misspelled address.
Didn't see the bounce until today. Sorry!]

I sent the message below on December 22.
In the ensuing discussion, there was a lot of discussion where people 
proposed various things, but very few people who were saying that any 
mechanism could be abandoned.

So - in the interest of simplicity - I'm deciding that we're NOT adding a 
new mechanism this time around.

A number of people have noted that they have recommended to their authors 
that they should CC the WG chair on submission, so that the WG chair can 
send "I agree" without waiting for the secretariat to ask. This is an 
optimization, and we should recommend it. It doesn't change the procedures 
below.

So - No change. You can send the list, or you can approve the document when 
you hear of it (from the secretiariat or from the author).

See you all in Minneapolis!

                        Harald

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: 22. desember 2004 23:17 +0100
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: INVALID_ADDRESS
Subject: Schedule for -00 WG drafts

Hi,

the approval procedures for initial (-00) WG drafts (draft-ietf-wgname-)
has seemed to cause a lot of confusion.

Let me see if I can attempt to say what the current procedure is, and then
suggest a change to it.

The main point of the procedure is: An initial WG draft must be approved by
the WG chair.

Outside of the "meeting crunch", the normal procedure is:

- Author sends in the draft
- The I-D publisher sends back a response to the author saying "you need
your WG chair's approval"
- The WG chair sends an "I approve" message to the I-D publisher
- The draft is published

During the "meeting crunch", the secretariat tries to streamline as much as
possible. So it has said to the WG chairs: "If you tell us the names of the
initial WG drafts you expect to see, we can approve them without asking you
- please send the list 1 week before the -00 deadline".

In this case, the procedure becomes:

- Author sends in the draft
- The I-D publisher checks it against the list
- If it's on the list, it's published. If not, revert to procedure above.

Clear so far?

Now the suggested modification to procedure:

- If the e-mail with the draft comes from a WG chair, it gets published.

This does NOT mean that the WG chair becomes an author. The normal case
would be that the editor sends to the WG chair, and the WG chair forwards
the message to the I-D publisher; the author is still the author.

But it removes the need for the WG chair to generate those lists.

Does it make sense to people to add this possibility?

And - if this makes sense - do we still need the two other procedures
described above, can we remove one of them, or can we say "this is how all
-00 WG drafts come out"?

Of course, this will all be changed once the online draft submission tool
comes out....

                        Harald

---------- End Forwarded Message ----------