IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Icar] an early review experiment

Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> Wed, 19 May 2004 21:58 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (iesg.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA22447 for <icar-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:58:42 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQZ2C-0001ql-Tm for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:55:32 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i4JLtWTi007107 for icar-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:55:32 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQYmm-00052p-PR for icar-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:39:36 -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 RAA20301 for <icar-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:39:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQYmk-0004kP-1v for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:39:34 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQYjT-00043j-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:36:12 -0400
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQYed-0003N6-00 for icar-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:31:12 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQYJR-0000kA-20; Wed, 19 May 2004 17:09:17 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BQXOK-0003Ji-AM for icar@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:10:16 -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 QAA10508 for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:10:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BQXOI-00052a-Cf for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:10:14 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BQXNV-0004tq-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:09:25 -0400
Received: from wyvern.icir.org ([192.150.187.14]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BQXMO-0004jf-00 for icar@ietf.org; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:08:17 -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 i4JK8Eim061539 for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 13:08:14 -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 9C98277AA5C for <icar@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 May 2004 16:08:12 -0400 (EDT)
To: icar@ietf.org
From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
Reply-To: mallman@icir.org
Subject: Re: [Icar] an early review experiment
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 16:08:12 -0400
Message-Id: <20040519200812.9C98277AA5C@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

(I should not be allowed to write email.)

> 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.  

Let me revise the first bullet above ...

  + one end of the spectrum would be that ICAR-type comments must be
    followed before the document moves forward (i.e., these comments are
    binding on the WG and the WG must fix the document accordingly)

allman

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email