IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists"

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Wed, 28 November 2012 09:24 UTC

Return-Path: <dromasca@avaya.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 B816F21F8745 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:24:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.266
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iYOzyFLpQI9F for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:24:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B41A921F86AF for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:24:04 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAFAPsvoFCHCzI1/2dsb2JhbABEgmzAaYEIgh4BAQEBAxIoNBcEAgEIDQQEAQELFAkHMhQJCAIEARIIGodoAZ4xnACMFRqFT2EDnAmKNoJvgWQXHg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,759,1344225600"; d="scan'208";a="378042000"
Received: from unknown (HELO p-us1-erheast.us1.avaya.com) ([135.11.50.53]) by co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2012 04:15:38 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO DC-US1HCEX3.global.avaya.com) ([135.11.52.22]) by p-us1-erheast-out.us1.avaya.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2012 04:00:13 -0500
Received: from AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com (135.64.58.13) by DC-US1HCEX3.global.avaya.com (135.11.52.22) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.106.1; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 04:23:55 -0500
Received: from AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com ([fe80::6db7:b0af:8480:c126]) by AZ-FFEXHC03.global.avaya.com ([135.64.58.13]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Wed, 28 Nov 2012 04:23:53 -0500
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists"
Thread-Topic: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists"
Thread-Index: AQHNzMkZpIsZvW2c9EmrcbE2PQN0W5f+aLAAgACQuWA=
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 09:23:52 +0000
Message-ID: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA023279@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
References: <CAC4RtVCogYS4tmY1LLi0C-E+B+di2_wTD0N-=AZrVR7-A8Mz+A@mail.gmail.com> <50B51774.6070607@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <50B51774.6070607@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.64.58.45]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 28 Nov 2012 09:24:07 -0000

+1

The length of the written mail list track of a document is only one indicator. It's an important one, but it should not be treated as absolute. Sometimes 2-3 people debated one obscure aspect of the document in tens of messages. 

In the case when a document generated zero or very little discussion on the mail list, and yet the write-up mentions 'broad consensus' I would recommend to verify what is the 'broad consensus' assessment based upon. 

Regards,

Dan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Melinda Shore
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 9:42 PM
> To: ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: "IETF work is done on the mailing lists"
> 
> I think the core issue is whether or not there's been adequate review,
> and it seems to me to be appropriate to request volunteers from wg
> participants to review documents before moving them along.
> 
> Melinda

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email