Subject: RE: Clarification of I-D Submission Deadlines

From: "Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2005 12:22:45 +0200

Hello everybody,

this is the general trade-off between having time to read the drafts and
flexibility to have the newest revisions possible for the actual IETF
meeting. Usually, it is just a question of preference and is highly
dependent on the "culture" and situation of a WG which fits the WG best.

We have used in v6ops WG sometimes the possibility to work on stuff and
get into an agreement on difficult issues during the IETF week. Then we
had the chance to present the agreement in the session later in the
week. However, as the ids cannot be published during the IETF week there
has been little incentive for people to change the drafts directly, but
people usually just show on slides what was the conclusion. Doing the
new revision of the draft then takes time.

If there would be a possibility to submit and publish drafts during the
meeting would be a nice feature. It could be left to the WG chairs to
see that it is not misused.

Cheers,

Jonne.

On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 04:58, ext Scott Bradner wrote:
> Harald sez:
> 
> > .... once we get 
> > the automatic submission mechanism in place, so that the "load on staff" 
> > argument goes away, we might try an IETF with no I-D blackout period,
> 
> only if we want to bend RFC 2418
> 
> 7.1. Session documents
> 
>    All relevant documents to be discussed at a session should be
>    published and available as Internet-Drafts at least two weeks before
>    a session starts.  Any document which does not meet this publication
>    deadline can only be discussed in a working group session with the
>    specific approval of the working group chair(s).  Since it is
>    important that working group members have adequate time to review all
>    documents, granting such an exception should only be done under
>    unusual conditions.  
> 
> Scott
-- 
Jonne Soininen
Nokia

Tel: +358 40 527 46 34
E-mail: [email-masked]

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 13:48:18 -0600

> only if we want to bend RFC 2418

The paragraph you quote does not say anything about publishing I-Ds.
Operating with no blackout period would move ALL the responsibility for 
policing this paragraph to the WG chairs.

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 13:50:05 -0600

> see that it is not misused.

Nit:

Submitting I-Ds during IETF week has been supported for a long time.
The Washington IETF was the first IETF (I think) where the secretariat 
actually published some of those I-Ds during IETF week.

               Harald

---

From: avri doria <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 15:56:51 -0600

On 7 mar 2005, at 13.48, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> Operating with no blackout period would move ALL the responsibility 
> for policing this paragraph to the WG chairs.
>
>

Sounds reasonable to me.

a.