Review timing [ [Gen-art] Re: review of draft-simon-emu-rfc2716bis-12.txt]

Bernard,

On 2008-01-11 09:58, Bernard Aboba wrote:
...
> BTW, I'd note that there were some issues in the scheduling of this
> GEN-ART review, given that the document was to have been considered
> on the IESG agenda today.   As a result, Sam objected to my addressing your
> comments (even though the changes were purely editorial) and will delay
> the processing of the document (see below).  So perhaps the GEN-ART
> reviews need to come in sooner (or the IESG needs to be informed when
> they are going to come in so they are not suprised).  

Having seen this from both sides of the fence, I think it's very hard
to avoid occasional glitches of this nature. I can never say when
my review will be done - and I send it in immediately that it is done.
We try to get them to Russ ASAP, but in practice we have only 2 or 3
working days between the review assignments and when Russ needs
them. Sometimes, they come in late, but it's unpredictable.

Our standard review boilerplate says:

"Please wait for direction from your document shepherd
 or AD before posting a new version of the draft."

In practice, that means: don't update the draft until after
the IESG telechat, so that all IESG comments can be handled
simultaneously. Remember that Gen-ART is reviewing on behalf
of the General AD - if Russ decides that the reviewer's
comments are unimportant, he'll ballot No Objection.

   Brian

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art