Re: [dhcwg] DHCPv6 Failover -- LAST CHANCE

[神明達哉 <[e-mail]>]

At Sat, 3 Sep 2016 09:21:38 -0400,
Ted Lemon <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Jinmei-san, the question is, is it better to publish something that's
> basically good but has a few non-blocking issues, or to not publish it at
> all?   I too would like to see the document get more review and maybe a
> couple of interoperating implementations, but if we have to wait for the
> bis document for that, I'm okay with it.

This is the conclusion of the previous WGLC (including the original
call text)):
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg/current/msg17438.html

The last call states:

>> We will need several serious reviews of this document for it to
>> pass WGLC.

and the conclusion was:

>> But sadly (as I need to make the call as Tomek is a co-author), I
>> don’t think we’re ready to advance this document. We will try again
>> and hopefully get some more participation.

I interpreted it as it didn't pass because there were not sufficient
number of "serious reviews".  If my interpretation is correct and the
situation hasn't changed since then (I wasn't in Berlin even remotely
and the meeting minutes and the retried last call text are not very
clear on this), I would expect this latest last call is also seeking
"several serious reviews".  So it looked awkward to me that the wg now
seems to ask people for stating a one-line, lightweight "support or
not support" feedback.

According to your above comment, perhaps the sense of the bar to
advance it has been revised from "several more serious reviews" to a
few more one-line "yes" responses through a discussion that I didn't
participate in.  If so, I have no problem with that, although it would
have been nicer if that had been clarified in the revised last call
text.  If the bar hasn't changed, I personally think we are having a
due diligence issue.

In any case, I don't intend to be a blocker for this document
especially when I can't be more productive by providing a "serious
review" myself.  So I'll shut up on this with this message.

--
JINMEI, Tatuya