Re: [apps-review] Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

SM wrote:

> Hello,

Hi SM,
A couple of comments:

> I have been acting as Applications Area Review Team Lead for nearly a 
> year.  My assessment is that the team is still not fully functional.  
> Alexey made some suggestions.  Please comment on the following 
> suggested changes:
>
> There are three kinds of requests:
>
>  (a) Early reviews requested by the Apps Area ADs
>
>  (b) Review of a document in Last Call
>
>  (c) Document on the IESG Agenda
>
> I would like to minimize requests for (c) as it would mean a short 
> deadline for assignments.

GenArt and SecDir ask reviewers to confirm that their issues were 
addressed and/or appropriately discussed before documents are put on 
IESG telechat. Maybe we should do the same.
 [...]

> The review template at 
> http://www.apps.ietf.org/content/apps-review-template suggests that 
> the review should provide a one-sentence summary, e.g.:
>
>  (i)   This draft is ready for publication as an Experimental RFC
>
>  (ii)  This draft is almost ready for publication as an Informational 
> RFC but
>        has a few issues that should be fixed before publication
>
>  (iii) This draft is not ready for publication as a Proposed Standard and
>        should be revised before publication
>
> followed by major issues, minor issues and nits.
>
> Major issues are the type of concerns that will result in the document 
> being blocked until they are resolved.
>
> Minor issues are concerns about clarity or technical accuracy that 
> should be discussed and resolved before publication, but which would 
> normally be resolved between the authors and the reviewers.
>
> Nits are editorial or layout items.  They would ideally be resolved 
> before publication to make the document more readable.  Usually a 
> reviewer will not be looking for this type of issue, but may find some 
> in the course of the review.
>
> If you have any other suggestions, please send them to the list.

I also want to remind everybody that Apps Review Team reviews are 
treated as IETF LC comments and have no more weight then them. 
Sponsoring ADs should take them into considerations, but they might 
disagree with certain conclusions made by reviewers (e.g. which issues 
are major, which are minor, which are blocking, etc.).