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

SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Sun, 20 March 2011 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-review@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A03DC3A6BE2 for <apps-review@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:21:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.569
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.569 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.031, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QU+tqm0gR0wz for <apps-review@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:21:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.elandsys.com (mail.elandsys.com [208.69.177.125]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C1BB3A6BDF for <apps-review@ietf.org>; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:21:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([41.136.233.187]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.elandsys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p2KLN8r3007945; Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:23:14 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1300656196; bh=TJ/uERjEXu/cupGb/yEUFg2QseQ=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=dtaj5dJtYm8v3hfhePT1CsxNob9D+m9z4sAqzHEgpUf3jtB33ZVzOrpJDQ1XRFp4+ HrUfK7kawNvcEuwIudhf6Zb0LcEIalf9bDZUsGmWHLDDxHuB7Nv8NzHdyILWVVcVnF fvHZNjLTD4/onW/dN+KeYq0QOqQ0XUqi0uscEfdU=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20110320113434.0c1626b8@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 13:08:53 -0700
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
From: SM <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D861898.2040101@isode.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20110318165117.0d43e6e0@elandnews.com> <4D861898.2040101@isode.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Cc: Pete Resnick <presnick@qualcomm.com>, apps-review@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-review] Suggested changes for Applications Area Review Team
X-BeenThere: apps-review@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Apps Area Review List <apps-review.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-review>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-review@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review>, <mailto:apps-review-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 21:21:51 -0000

Hi Alexey,

As you are the outgoing Apps Area AD, I can now defriend you. 
:-)  The new Apps Area AD will be Pete Resnick.

I would like to thank you for your support and advice since I took 
over.  You have been extremely responsive.  The output of the 
Applications Area Review Team is a reflection of the work of Peter, 
you and the reviewers.  I enjoyed working with you.  You gave honest 
answers instead of the politically correct line.

At 08:09 20-03-2011, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>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.

That's a good idea.

>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.).

Yes.

One suggested change that has not be discussed is the Team Lead.  The 
Team Lead should have a good relationship with the Apps Area ADs as 
he or she works under their direction.  Keeping a Team Lead for too 
long does not ensure continuity.  I would like the team to discuss 
with the Apps Area ADs when they meet in person about:

  (i)   Should the Team Lead be selected for a year only

  (ii)  Should the Team Lead have IESG experience to provide better guidance
        to reviewers

Unless there are objections, I will be updating the Applications Area 
Review Team web page to include the email address of the team 
members.  I will also be sending out individual emails on a yearly 
basis to enquire about whether the team member can still take on the 
commitment to perform Apps Area reviews.

Best regards,
-sm