Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Wed, 06 November 2019 22:55 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9EE81201B7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 14:55:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4F5VmZuj_Fdg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 14:55:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf1-x431.google.com (mail-pf1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F219120147 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 14:55:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf1-x431.google.com with SMTP id c13so293062pfp.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 14:55:03 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=UlUJYqQElHkccjwITFiYSJkWHNYdGQnDNVcdFe9qi0c=; b=M20xb1Bv7ksCu1HFlvMr9M/2HFwM5jIfdasmdHAH8l8r+H4T32cT7ixtEIC78x1YZ3 4oS01AxW4Y/f87heyo+BDvr5QezZXSRohSs5ipnPOCefV/uAiuHk6nya1SAikCf6IgWR SaBxWWYMMKvY+kRldsxOyuYSwJkTSGazyhWF8XxHy725OdPpygfDNYBGYq+Nmnv4qJI5 5+5ElRJhWLAeGZHMAkqsmq5UUsIuYn1wXiDwobTnOVENOC2LKlbxZ29SPlCmpj2/lRBu Fy8Fzz7gHB5P6U3d35cgStna9Yh17gzCFEgJbYHioeQmsFc314BK3GiRaMXALMoIVJZq zNpg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=UlUJYqQElHkccjwITFiYSJkWHNYdGQnDNVcdFe9qi0c=; b=dnMXAg5qt+HyEJD+ZKHOKUvnUtq2pNYpXl7083KqNZMI6Z211jNpGrNomr8MkH4IBY v25lIeV3ZsqT4y8JuQOEzmoEV1gAkVOH1IeurXMy5SC2npUiDFRvdZuK4ySeXt/ybi+Y Bqx/h6WvEK8P/27pAaZlFrgDbH1WLsmOMzK65S02aQZ2cAQ5SynA+2mazBNReOKfyNIP VHQ2itE/ss01kzrEFhU/daPs/vzIxy+Tp2j06sD/6aunrGdB0l/z1KMHJ+u/r7k1GjuM BcJY5Ck2V92rRs8EuJocLk3ZONHzndfdEq9SIFyVsy13NX9T1TD5N0gCWWmZHe+e0fQ4 bWJw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWQOLWmj8ymYCNoL0fyKkYfFwbQBTs8oMwxpv1nZuvaS2bQ9KSP nn4U9XRCilUY/x/5XNDwj6s=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxB78tH3u0J3LrlrrhW/COna0IN+gwUjddmUrWlQ9/RQJwNhH652uyx3x2L1dAzkgNAie7KmQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:b644:: with SMTP id v4mr339372pgt.249.1573080902402; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 14:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (8.166.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.166.8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c16sm36658pfo.34.2019.11.06.14.54.59 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Nov 2019 14:55:01 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <157279399807.13506.13363770981495597049.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <0EF64763-BA25-468A-B387-91445A61D318@gmail.com> <CAJU8_nUovmFmgNiYx0ez_1f+GPdU9xGViDYWfowEEomrn0pyDw@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.LRH.2.21.1911040841160.27600@bofh.nohats.ca> <CE06CC6D-E37F-4C90-B782-D14B1D715D4B@cable.comcast.com> <38E47448-63B4-4A5D-8A9D-3AB890EBDDDD@akamai.com> <09886edb-4302-b309-9eaa-f016c4487128@gmail.com> <26819.1572990657@localhost> <2668fa45-7667-51a6-7cb6-4b704c7fba5a@isode.com> <2C97D18E-3DA0-4A2D-8179-6D86EB835783@gmail.com> <91686B28-9583-4A8E-AF8A-E66977B1FE13@gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <012b9437-4440-915c-f1f9-b85e1b0be768@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 11:54:59 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <91686B28-9583-4A8E-AF8A-E66977B1FE13@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6HZjtry-PZfINq-E26lXJdiGAZs>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 22:55:05 -0000

Here's a thought experiment.

Update the standards process such that the approval of Proposed Standard
RFCs, after an IETF last call including some specified cross-area review
requirements, is done by the WG consensus process with the consent of the AD .

Why would that work? Because it now incents the WG chairs by making them,
in effect, where the buck stops. So the WG chairs and AD (typically
a committee of three) will feel the obligation to get everything
right. And it scales.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 07-Nov-19 06:04, Bob Hinden wrote:
> Ralph,
> 
>> On Nov 6, 2019, at 3:03 AM, Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> We shouldn't be depending on last-minute quality checks to maintain the quality of our output.  Working groups should be producing documents that are ready to publish, and develop trust that their documents are high quality.
>>
> 
> I agree.  This pushes most of the responsibility to the w.g. chairs, where IMHO it belongs.   This does scale with the number of working groups.
> 
> Bob
> 
>