IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review postings (Was: Re: Review of draft-ietf-geojson-text-sequence-03)

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 24 January 2017 19:05 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FFA4129656 for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:05:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nJPjmDyDt_9b for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:05:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x244.google.com (mail-pg0-x244.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::244]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B10912965A for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:05:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x244.google.com with SMTP id 194so17342617pgd.0 for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:05:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6vp6/PHEP+FkeW8H7a4GPvHn8gsYG3z4kLYL/Cesh9U=; b=b/yFrEH+RIkgMRUdtqb4n/sPE+s3nQZdMl80Po/D5tHGhICvtbwUNPCcL1/1xezOSB a4G+JJ6YEjxEiCsBpXEckHEVJXXfhzgW5s4fBftaYfN6gg4G7jObdfUjHq0WdGN4uLan tnLh+ScFK508CvyubXUMgPvCDDn28j38wevCor34GVM745JXDxTtqja/YhVcMLPYVokI 9cc3VDkeWWLfshYPeRIJdM56C1yxTf2i76ap96AhdO6SZ7BMluGLr/sC6tjNRy5ZNb+5 lnl3A0X7a9MweMdUTnZEcETHByjltm47hyY8txlurjuSrFHmWioKlgKZj2HuAvrOsuDR 4MhQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=6vp6/PHEP+FkeW8H7a4GPvHn8gsYG3z4kLYL/Cesh9U=; b=KRwE2TxAWEhetHjJ9HNa/Yb1Hz4e0FyORXZpaTGWYfXud+XKomRxrev3fvU1h6IUWs X6i1H4y4qyf66QfpBL7f0ict8fHbsgJwJXZq/NeeVjDlzoxPG0wzsTJIIC35ipBa35oe p2LF6Vt2wF2k/RqPYCGLbGXqOpD3jV9yzkQ+B+z+zEpXXTF7t8k1nqo83qDGP8Q8hm0W RZsdRX9JgJNMIlHEnyhoK8LTQq4A0F2xwZ56JJt+pLY9ZYI4NoWsxAO2XxNOuN0jbrax mzE4K8NIIH8zjkLUF+r6s0267XuD31b2k50r1GGbVRsax0nrsRTqEZujnXsN/Bp+E5EK 1GIQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKp9zdDkrxBsUybND+iPxdI8rTWFUJz4snSNKMRc+3CAxSWybZfMdqQMmgSawE4ew==
X-Received: by 10.99.149.27 with SMTP id p27mr41782200pgd.21.1485284699725; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:04:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:6382:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:6382:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c204sm46504880pfb.51.2017.01.24.11.04.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 11:04:59 -0800 (PST)
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
References: <8760l4jx50.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <94a369bc-84d8-1fd9-1942-c4afaa56c790@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:05:00 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8760l4jx50.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/I23C5_jZL1bRldF5aicURsTVct8>
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review postings (Was: Re: Review of draft-ietf-geojson-text-sequence-03)
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:05:04 -0000

On 25/01/2017 04:27, Dale R. Worley wrote:
...
> Also, is there a reason why people would want to see "Gen-ART last-call
> review of ..." vs. "Gen-ART telechat review of ..."?  It wouldn't make a
> difference to me, but perhaps it is useful input to someone else's
> workflow.

IMHO, it makes a difference. The primary audience for the LC review
is the authors - they are on the hook for *all* last call comments.
The primary audience for the telechat review is the General AD, who
needs to decide how to ballot. Back when I was General AD and Gen-ART
was relatively new, I generally didn't have time to even look at the
LC reviews. Having a distinctive subject on the email was very helpful.

  Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email