Subject: Re: I-D woes [Re: advice on role of a WG Chair]

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:34:20 -0400 (EDT)

> Personally I think that when a date is clearly incorrect due to
> an oversight or the version number that [email-masked] staff should
> simply make the corrections and publish the documents.  They can
> send back a note indicating that the corrections were made.

Typical IETF response: Doesn't scale.

Unless these sorts of corrections of trivial problems can be automated,
there's no way the human staff can do this.

Reasons for rejecting a draft ought to be kept in sync with idnits,
however.

Would an automated upload system (that could pop up the error window
for version number errors, etc.) scale?

--Sandy

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 11:26:25 -0400

>there's no way the human staff can do this.

Fully disagree. Part of the effort that has gone into creating IASA 
involves making sure that there is sufficient human staffing, with 
sufficient skills, where needed to make the IETF work.

Internet Drafts are vital to the IETF's functioning. If there needs 
to be some human staffing added to make all typical IETF participants 
be able to turn in Internet Drafts, IASA can make sure that the staff 
is available, particularly during crunch times.

IASA needs to known where that staffing is needed, and this thread 
shows that there is a fair amount of feeling that it needs be added 
both on better tools and on humans who can make simple changes to 
drafts to make sure they get published.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

---

From: Leslie Daigle <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 13:40:29 -0400

If staffing is the right answer, indeed, IASA needs to pursue it.

I'm not convinced staffing is the right answer, or that staff
*should* "just fix it" -- in cases where it's your document, you
need to do the fixes, for a whole herd of reasons.    (I don't
relish the thought of sitting through a thread discussing the
ways the Secretariat "screwed up my Internet-Draft because they
TOUCHED IT", let alone any legal implications of "just"
changing boilerplate).

I have *no* disagreement that we need to get to the point
where people are able to understand, in real time, if there
is a perceived issue and how they can fix it, without impeding their
timely contribution.

Leslie.

Paul Hoffman wrote:
> Internet Drafts are vital to the IETF's functioning. If there needs to 
> be some human staffing added to make all typical IETF participants be 
> able to turn in Internet Drafts, IASA can make sure that the staff is 
> available, particularly during crunch times.
> 
> IASA needs to known where that staffing is needed, and this thread shows 
> that there is a fair amount of feeling that it needs be added both on 
> better tools and on humans who can make simple changes to drafts to make 
> sure they get published.
> 
> 
> --Paul Hoffman, Director
> --VPN Consortium
> 
>