Subject: Problems Getting Drafts Posted?

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:54:01 -0700

Is anyone else having problems with the Secretariat in getting drafts 
posted? I've sent a couple of updated WG drafts to them 3 times over the 
last month, and all I got was an automated response saying I should post 
them again.

Also, the editor of an individual draft that is becoming a WG draft sent it 
and requested that it be posted, and it was not. I sent approval as WG chair 
but we didn't receive any request for AD approval or anything, and the draft 
has not been posted or appeared on the WG Web page.

            jak

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:59:02 -0700

Elwyn Davie tried to post a document last week in v6ops, and I don't  
see it yet. I sent a note to Ray P. asking what might be the problem  
and I got no response.

On Apr 26, 2006, at 9:54 AM, James Kempf wrote:

> Is anyone else having problems with the Secretariat in getting  
> drafts posted? I've sent a couple of updated WG drafts to them 3  
> times over the last month, and all I got was an automated response  
> saying I should post them again.
>
> Also, the editor of an individual draft that is becoming a WG draft  
> sent it and requested that it be posted, and it was not. I sent  
> approval as WG chair but we didn't receive any request for AD  
> approval or anything, and the draft has not been posted or appeared  
> on the WG Web page.
>
>            jak

---

From: Lakshminath Dondeti <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 11:07:36 -0700

I (or one of my co-authors) posted a couple in the past week or so 
and they showed up quite promptly.

regards,
Lakshminath

---

From: Dean Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 15:57:05 -0500

> approval or anything, and the draft has not been posted or appeared  

I had one where the i-d-alias kicked back a message to the poster  
saying "get chair approval" but did not include the chair. The poster  
copied me, I replied including i-d-alias and adding an approval, and  
the draft was posted within 24 hours.

But this is a change from long-standing behavior, where the original  
i-d-alias response would have included the chairs. Looks like we have  
new people in the role.

--
Dean

---

From: "James Kempf" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 14:13:29 -0700

I never received a notification on the WG-to-be draft.

            jak

---

From: "James M. Polk" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 16:16:57 -0500

TSVWG recently had two WG docs post the day I received the original request 
to post from the authors to I-Ds.  I was amazed at the speed, which seems 
contradictory to what others are experiencing here...

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:18:14 +0200

Fred Baker wrote:
> XXX tried to post a document last week in v6ops, and I don't  

Firstly, the IAD happens to be on vacation this week.

Secondly, your first port of call (if [email-masked] doesn't
respond) should be [email-masked]. The IAD doesn't manage daily
operations.

Third, when drafts get bounced with a canned message, it generally means
that there *is* some sort of format or boilerplate error. Frankly, it
happens much more often to people who don't use xml2rfc, because the
other methods place much more responsibility for the details on
the author.

Fourth, extreme clarity is needed in the exchange of messages to get
a draft-ietf-WGNAME-*-00 draft posted. A misleading subject field
or a typo in the filename is enough to cause confusion.

Finally, yes we want to improve this and an automated submission tool
is high on the project list, but is not a small job.

     Brian