Re: Last Call: <draft-arkko-iesg-crossarea-02.txt> (Experiences from Cross-Area Work at the IETF) to Informational RFC

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

Reply to your request dated 07/02/2013
Draft Reviewed By: Abdussalam Baryun (AB)   Dated: 10/02/2013

Reviewer Comment #AB1: I-D Overall Idea and Aim
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I support strongly the idea-work but not publication, the draft needs
to be completed (i.e. the aim was not targeted well). The work should
involve the IESG, or analysis of process procedures in IETF including
IESG. A survey of the IESG members' opinion will help the work value.

I don't think a description of the examples/problem/challenges and
giving recommendation is enough for this work. I recommend the draft
adds analysis of process of the IETF best practices. From the draft we
may understand that our best practices are not recommended, the author
does not mention related RFCs and other BCPs than RFC2026 (is it the
only related document?).

AB> the abstract should include that the draft is the authors opinion,
it was only mentioned in acknowledgement.
AB> Questions> What is missing in IESG? how they have no strategy?
very strange to me to read the section related to IESG without any
reference or history? Is the document based on the author's point of
view, not mentioned in Abstract how he evaluated the
processes/problem?

AB> The author should mention that he is a member of IESG and for how
long with dates at least. I recommend more referencing or reasons why
author beleives that. The reviewer does n't consider all the author
beleives only if reads the proof/reference reason.

This will not be the last message, will continue,

Regards
AB
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
This message is in compliance with the IETF regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


On 2/7/13, The IESG <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider
> the following document:
> - 'Experiences from Cross-Area Work at the IETF'
>   <draft-arkko-iesg-crossarea-02.txt> as Informational RFC
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> [e-mail] mailing lists by 2013-03-06. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [e-mail] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>
>    This memo discusses the reasons for IETF work on topics that cross
>    area boundaries.  Such cross-area work presents challenges for the
>    organization of the IETF as well as on how interested parties can
>    participate the work.  The memo also provides some suggestions on
>    managing these challenges.
>
>
>
>
> The file can be obtained via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arkko-iesg-crossarea/
>
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-arkko-iesg-crossarea/ballot/
>
>
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
>
>
>