Re: Late review management (Re: [Icar] independence of reviews; variability)

Harald,

HTA> If management of consistency of late reviews is completely independent from
HTA> other management structures, we set ourselves up for another "late 
HTA> surprise" problem - that the standards groups have been told to apply 
HTA> during development is not the standards they will be held to in the final 
HTA> review. So - I think that having *one* management structure for the IETF 
HTA> makes sense.

An interesting question is whether this potential disparity is a feature
or a bug? The sort of rigid control you are promoting can be its own
trap, for failing to detect problems.

If a collection of independent reviewers holds an assessment that is
markedly different that of one or more ADs, it might indicate a problem
with some of the reviewers or with the ADs holding objections.

Once again, diversity of perspectives is our friend... that is, if we
believe in community rough consensus, rather than hierarchical assertion
of authority.

The sort of homogeneity that you are espousing could easily encourage
production of specifications that are nicely in line with some AD's
desires, but not the desires of the community that must adopt and use
the specification.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>

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