Re: [apps-review] Feeling kind of confused about draft-merrick-jms-uri-12

[SM <[e-mail]>]

Hi John,

[following up on apps-review]

At 23:20 26-01-11, John C Klensin wrote:
>Remember too that, as Mark has already pointed out in a
>different way, the main point of a provisional registration is
>to lower the odds that the same protocol identifier string will
>be used to designate two different protocols.

Mark and you have commented on this case.  There was a comment from 
Larry ( 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg02096.html ).

>I am not advising this in any way and I personally don't think
>it would be worth the effort, but, in the interest of procedural
>knowledge and consistency, RFC 2026 does give anyone who feels
>strongly about this decision the right to appeal it.

I suggest talking to the Apps Area Directors before taking that path.

When a request for review come from the Apps Area Directors, I pick a 
reviewer for the assignment.  There was a case where the document was 
over 300 pages and there was a short deadline.  I mentioned to the 
ADs that it would be too much work and they agreed not to request a 
review by the team.  The assignment task generally works like this:

  (a) Receive request for review

  (b) Verify whether the document is relevant to the Apps Area
      and that there is a team member with the expertise to
      perform the review

  (c) Assign the review to a team member

  (d) Add the document to the Apps Area Review tracker

  (e) Send out reminders to the reviewer

  (f) Update the Apps Area Review tracker once the review is submitted

I think that the Apps Area Directors find the reviews useful or else 
they would not have asked for it.  Some authors respond to the 
reviews.  For example:

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01740.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01814.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01828.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01835.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg02124.html

The Apps Area Team reviews are also copied to the IESG as an AD asked 
for that after he read one of the Apps Area reviews.  The reviews are 
also read by future authors and it can help them when they write an 
Internet-Draft.

It has been difficult to get all the reviews done.  I value the 
contributions made by Tim and all members of the team.  I may voice 
my discontent to the Apps Area ADs if a reviewer mentions that 
his/her work is not given any consideration.

Best regards,
-sm