IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com> Wed, 14 January 2004 18:59 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA03354 for <icar-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:59:27 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgqEG-0000eb-24 for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:59:00 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i0EIx0Ew002512 for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:59:00 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgqEF-0000eR-UE for icar-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:58:59 -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 NAA03346 for <icar-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:58:57 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgqED-0002kp-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:58:57 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgqDK-0002jL-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:58:02 -0500
Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgqCS-0002h0-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:57:08 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgqCJ-0000aZ-Lx; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:56:59 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AgqCG-0000Zd-PO for icar@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:56:56 -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 NAA03285 for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:56:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgqCE-0002g9-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:56:54 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AgqBc-0002eP-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:56:16 -0500
Received: from measurement-factory.com ([206.168.0.5]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AgqAw-0002Yp-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 13:55:34 -0500
Received: from measurement-factory.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i0EItWk3030665; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:55:32 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from rousskov@measurement-factory.com)
Received: (from rousskov@localhost) by measurement-factory.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id i0EItW3h030664; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:55:32 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from rousskov)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:55:32 -0700 (MST)
From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
cc: "Michael A. Patton" <MAP@MAP-NE.com>, icar@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Icar] Reviewers: One single group or per-area groups?
In-Reply-To: <144370974.1074032554@localhost>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0401141149320.23494@measurement-factory.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> <144370974.1074032554@localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60

On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:

> 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.

Just for the record: The above is easy to ensure with both single pool
of reviewers and a collection of area-specific boards. It is not a
distinction point in the "One single group or per-area groups?"
debate.

In fact, a single pool architecture makes it somewhat easier to
support expertise areas that are not accurately covered by any
existing IETF area. With a single pool, one can "tag" individual
reviewers, and each reviewer may have several tags. The same can be
done in isolated boards, but tagging in a single pool is more
_natural_ than cross-area tagging in area-specific boards, IMO.

Alex.

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

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email