IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Icar] an early review experiment

Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> Wed, 19 May 2004 19:40 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA06901 for <icar-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 15:40:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQWl7-0007dV-6U for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 15:29:45 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4JJTj6q029342 for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 15:29:45 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQW7T-0002kP-Cl for icar-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 14:48:47 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA00036 for <icar-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 14:48:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQW7Q-0000J7-Iu for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 14:48:44 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQW6C-00008F-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 14:47:29 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQW5W-0007mA-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 14:46:46 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQVmc-0006EK-Sz; Wed, 19 May 2004 14:27:14 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQSQA-0000bR-Ia for icar@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:51:50 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA16906 for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:51:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQSQ8-0002wb-2G for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:51:48 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQSPB-0002tS-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:50:49 -0400
Received: from wyvern.icir.org ([192.150.187.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQSOM-0002pg-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:49:58 -0400
Received: from guns.icir.org (adsl-68-76-113-50.dsl.bcvloh.ameritech.net [68.76.113.50]) by wyvern.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id i4JEnpim055572; Wed, 19 May 2004 07:49:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from mallman@guns.icir.org)
Received: from guns.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by guns.icir.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB9D977AA5C; Wed, 19 May 2004 10:49:50 -0400 (EDT)
To: Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>
From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
Reply-To: mallman@icir.org
Cc: icar@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Icar] an early review experiment
In-Reply-To: <00FC40D4-A9A2-11D8-8468-000A95E35274@cisco.com>
Organization: ICSI Center for Internet Research (ICIR)
Song-of-the-Day: Panama
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 10:49:50 -0400
Message-Id: <20040519144950.EB9D977AA5C@guns.icir.org>
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

> >   + How binding are early, cross area review comments on authors /
> >     editors / WGs?
> 
> I'm not sure they're *binding*, although they're surely more weighty.

"More weighty" than ... what?

If I were to sketch the "weighyness" space of early, cross area reviews,
it'd be something like this:

  + one end of the spectrum would be that ICAR-type comments must be
    addressed before the document moves forward

  + the other end of the space seems to me to be that the ICAR-type
    reviews are just like any other review that comes in from a
    community member (i.e., no special status)

  + there may be middle ground

It'd be nice to hear thoughts on where folks are in this space.  

(If I were to interpret what has been said thus far, I'd say Pekka's
note falls under the first bullet and Melinda's note under the second.
Roughly.  If that is way off, of course you should yell because I don't
want to put words in anyone's mouth.)

Thanks!

allman

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email