IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Icar] Reviewers: One single group or per-area groups?

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 14 January 2004 18:20 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01476 for <icar-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:20:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgpcQ-0006yK-8V for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:19:54 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0EIJsMs026796 for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:19:54 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgpcQ-0006y7-4c for icar-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:19:54 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01460 for <icar-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:19:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgpcO-0000vT-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:19:52 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgpbS-0000tX-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:18:55 -0500
Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Agpab-0000s0-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:18:01 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Agpab-0006rV-3K; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:18:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgpZa-0006qU-TG for icar@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:17:01 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01326 for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:16:55 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgpZY-0000pQ-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:16:57 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgpYc-0000nc-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:15:59 -0500
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgpXk-0000ir-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:15:04 -0500
Received: from halvestr-w2k1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id E99A761C12; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 19:14:31 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 22:22:34 -0800
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
To: "Michael A. Patton" <MAP@MAP-NE.com>, icar@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Icar] Reviewers: One single group or per-area groups?
Message-ID: <144370974.1074032554@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <20040113131211.7AD0A3F746@Mail.MAP-NE.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040109203410.04552a28@ms101.mail1.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20040110075158.0385bbd0@ms101.mail1.com> <Pine.BSF.4.58.0401121401500.15125@measurement-factory.com> <20040113131211.7AD0A3F746@Mail.MAP-NE.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: icar-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: icar-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: icar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar>, <mailto:icar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Improved Cross-Area Review <icar.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:icar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar>, <mailto:icar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_PAST_06_12 autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Michael,

let me just drop by to offer a contrarian view.....
in the current IESG review structure, it is important for me to know that 
(for instance) SOMEONE will have looked at the security issues, and that 
SOMEONE will have tried to compile the MIB if there is one.

So the idea behind area-specific reviews is kind of generalizing this 
concept - that after looking at the list of reviewers and the areas they 
are reviewing for, we're pretty certain that the important angles have at 
least been glanced at.

This, of course, presupposes that that some kind of (implicit or explicit) 
"question list" exists for each area review, and that the sum of all areas' 
questions comes reasonably close to "covering the map" - this is an 
untested hypothesis for the reviewer case, but hasn't been too far from the 
truth for the IESG review case.....

                    Harald



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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email