Re: [babel] Work to do

[Donald Eastlake <[e-mail]>]

Hi Juliusz,

On Mon, Mar 26, 2018 at 3:17 PM, Juliusz Chroboczek <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> >> 1. draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis
> >>
> >> This has been in last call, like, forever. We're still waiting for IESG
> >> review, let's please make it happen. Donald, Russ, could you please poke
> >> the responsible AD?
>
> > While I think there is pretty strong support for this draft in the WG, I do
> > not believe that the Routing Directorate review comments that were sent 3
> > January 2018 have been resolved.
>
> I am not requesting publication at the current time.  I am requesting a review.

Sorry for misunderstanding you. The term "IESG Review" refers to the
ballot process and telechat in the IESG which occurs after AD review
and after publication request.

> The comments received in January do not constitute a review.  The reviewer
> only discussed Sections 1 and 2 (Introduction and Conceptual Overview),
> and then spent the rest of her review claiming that we do not deal with
> management.  I suspect that she may not even have read the technical parts
> of rfc6126bis.

I'll go back and re-read the conversation from January.

> > In particular those related to OAM which were also discussed on the
> > BABEL WG mailing list.
>
> I have sent a lengthy reply about management on 7 January, and requested
> a full review (in a separate mail).  It has been over two months now, and
> I have received no reply from her.

That is certainly a legitimate complaint. I'll see what I can do.

> > I believe that if we just declare consensus in the WG and request
> > publication of the current draft,
>
> I am not requesting publication at the current time.  I am requesting
> a full review of the document, including the technical parts.  It's up to
> the IESG, of course, but I am of the conviction that this can only be
> achieved by choosing a different reviewer.

Actually, it isn't up to the IESG. The document is still inside the
BABEL WG. If appropriate, we can certainly request assistance from our
AD. But, until WG consensus is declared and publication is requested,
the IESG normally doesn't have involvement with individual WG drafts.

Getting a full review with fresh eyes is an excellent path to take. As
I say, I'll see what I can do.

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   [phone] (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [e-mail]

> -- Juliusz