[Iccrg] Procedure for obtaining ICCRG reviews

[[e-mail] (Michael Welzl)]

Hi all,

Before I use it for the CTCP draft (which is the only one
on our table so far), I would like to solicit comments
on the email which I'm planning to use for obtaining
reviews.

In particular, I wonder what you think about the final
recommendation idea, which I derived from section 2 of
draft-ietf-tsvwg-cc-alt-04.txt - any suggestions are
welcome.

Cheers,
Michael


===========================================

Dear all,

As you probably know, ICCRG has agreed to obtain reviews
on experimental congestion control proposals before they
are brought to the IETF (specifically the TCPM group). While
the competence to actually decide about acceptance or not is
with TCPM, it is expected that they will take our reviews
into account. This process is outlined here:
http://www.ietf.org/IESG/content/ions/drafts/ion-tsv-alt-cc.txt

Right now, we are looking for reviews on draft-xyz:
http://...

We would like to get feedback within 2 1/2 months
(earlier if possible).

If you're interested in doing a review, please send a note
to Wes and me. Reviews can be sent to the list, or directly
to us for anonymization before reflecting them out to the
list, if desired.

Reviewers are strongly advised to:

* read draft-ietf-tsvwg-cc-alt-04:
  http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tsvwg-cc-alt-04.txt

* consider not only the draft alone, but also papers referenced
  therein, where the authors should have carried out a performance 
  evaluation of their mechanism, including studies which show the
  impact of the new mechanism on standard TCP. When looking at
  such studies, this document is recommended to be used for guidance:
  http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-tmrg-metrics-09.txt


Reviews should include one of the following final recommendations:

* Experimental 1:
  The proposed mechanism is judged to be safe to deploy for
  best-effort traffic in the global Internet and further
  investigated in that environment.

* Experimental 2 A:
  While promising, the proposed mechanism is not deemed safe
  enough for widespread deployment as best-effort traffic on
  the Internet, but can be specified to facilitate investigations
  in simulation, testbeds, or controlled environments.

* Experimental 2 B:
  The IETF does not yet have sufficient understanding to decide
  if the algorithm is or is not safe for deployment on the Internet.

* Informational:
  The proposed mechanism does not meet the criteria for recommending
  publication of the draft as an Experimental RFC. It should be
  considered for publication as an Informational RFC for the benefit
  of the IETF and IRTF communit, provided that it carries an
  explicit warning against using the scheme in the global Internet.
  
* Not ready:
  The draft is not ready for publication as an Experimental or
  Informational RFC.


A review can be as short as a selection from the list of options,
although preferably it would include at least some brief
discussion or justification. No matter how long the feedback
is, we expect reviewers to have thoroughly read all the
necessary material.

Thanks in advance to anyone who volunteers!

Cheers,
Michael

===========================================