Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 08 November 2019 03:54 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.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 41C0F12013A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:54:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=cryptonector.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 iFQOBaUnV_gf for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:54:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cheetah.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (cheetah.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 572A112006E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:54:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B63CC7404CF; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 03:54:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-8-64.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.8.64]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 34E6E740A5E; Fri, 8 Nov 2019 03:54:17 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a18.g.dreamhost.com ([TEMPUNAVAIL]. [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.5); Fri, 08 Nov 2019 03:54:17 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|nico@cryptonector.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Trouble-Juvenile: 622ceaf979f7d8cf_1573185257457_4274028628
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1573185257457:1211573768
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1573185257457
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EEB98E039; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:54:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h=date :from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=cryptonector.com; bh=iy1G/xgthuwDxd fM94vc90ef+dk=; b=doDuJZuZ656E+PVdtRrYtrreOIGhucenprRtEqH9kBHwqA 2wdQ7xwVPBWOOhoyJLvNdTuRzSzZyTU6YU6BUJliR+yEYfz77FpU7qmAhoU+Ig2u s34A8/FaYxYmPKFSInHCF0rTygbL6eOohYM+0IsvXRmulRTtgFdeCMZ48CFcQ=
Received: from localhost (unknown [24.28.108.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a18.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7B14F8DEA3; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 19:54:11 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 21:54:09 -0600
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a18
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Subject: Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
Message-ID: <20191108035408.GI12148@localhost>
References: <2C97D18E-3DA0-4A2D-8179-6D86EB835783@gmail.com> <91686B28-9583-4A8E-AF8A-E66977B1FE13@gmail.com> <012b9437-4440-915c-f1f9-b85e1b0be768@gmail.com> <20191107014849.GC12148@localhost> <57465486-71b1-a87a-fa8c-bad7157f9025@gmail.com> <3caeb4cf-b92b-99fd-77df-7b1aef3e2979@network-heretics.com> <20191107194408.GF12148@localhost> <9eab2c4e-455e-c3cb-cdf7-9c3467ada06c@gmail.com> <27509.1573177188@localhost> <12A2A91C-3773-4C63-89EA-5D187B858E14@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <12A2A91C-3773-4C63-89EA-5D187B858E14@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/FWJJXnEcjsHts4qQ2JlNp1BhnBU>
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: Fri, 08 Nov 2019 03:54:20 -0000

On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 05:42:19PM -0800, Bob Hinden wrote:
> >> In other words, the IESG simply busy-waits until all review issues
> >> have been resolved, rather than finding and fixing the issues
> >> personally.
> > 
> > Let's be clear: that means that reviewers are expected to engage with authors
> > to get the issues resolved.  This might surprise some reviewers.
> 
> Or better, the Document Shepard takes an active role to get the issues resolved.

The shepherd already has to write a summary, including a summary of
review obtained among other things, so we already have the right process
for making sure reviews don't get dropped.

But sure, WG chairs, ADs, and shepherds can also make sure to educate
reviewers.

Nico
--