Re: [Icar] Progress?

Joel,

Thanks for pursuing this.  By way of trying to help prime the pump:

JMH> Should the proposal explicitly address cross-area, or just outside the WG, or ?

Cross-area, versus outside the wg, can be viewed as two different
concerns, both very important.  Hence, I think the proposal should
deal explicitly with both, but leave the actual choices to the working
group.

This deferral to the wg is based on the view that the proposal should
provide a mechanism that is available to the working group, but that
the wg chooses whether to use it, rather than having the proposal
impose anything on the wg.

JMH> Should the proposal address the reported problems from other review panels
JMH> with calling for volunteers to review specific documents?

That would be nice, but not essential.  All feedback is relevant.
Requiring that a particular proposal deal with the entire range of
possible feedback could be more distracting than beneficial.

JMH> Should the proposal have detailed requirements for the review, or just
JMH> guidelines as to what an initial summary needs to say?

If we view proposals as offering services to working groups, rather
than imposing requirements to them, then the the question of review
process and content detail become a matter of quality and style,
rather than formal requirement. More detail is usually better, but not
always.

JMH> Should the proposal include requirements / restrictions on qualifications
JMH> of reviewers?

Again, this is a matter of addressing quality control of the review
process.  The more random and unpredictable the backgrounds and skills
of the reviewers, the more random and unpredictable will be their
reviews.

JMH> Should a proposal provide for formal inclusion of early review in the
JMH> standards process, or should it just be a mechanism for a WG getting early
JMH> feedback?

I think the formal view should be the latter, and that the former will
evolve naturally from that, as the reviewing is shown to improve
quality and timeliness.

JMH> Should the proposal provide incentives for WGs to make use of early
JMH> reviews, or "rewards" for doing so?

BY implication, yes, but not by formal rule.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>

_______________________________________________
Icar mailing list
Icar@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar