Re: Quality of Directorate reviews

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 06 November 2019 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@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 486F7120869 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 07:19:52 -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 IguGXiezgUnk for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 07:19:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x82c.google.com (mail-qt1-x82c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82c]) (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 439CF120B1D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 07:19:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x82c.google.com with SMTP id y10so27295888qto.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 07:19:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=sPgrZiPrzhYz4UKSw5g42yrbi13v/Dst2ZSCd3ebus4=; b=lkLFl+fq10uVV+maRTzM/GhpwsInvZioPw8V/MsQ26tax2a3qTbfI/cPXuDizYe7vz 8Sc5h9b1gv0BN/DOBQiHK4VBRB2sQQQVK+gcv315TPdDE50n32MCk0caY2qaiZYu0t8K plBEsAA6N8ytF6T00o3zQrJpgrzXKkw+aq92MHjW8F/IcOaYkFCkHLLZTqkTSdsz0EFZ z3k1b1rIo07XA3Ureiqaf+fTbd/g5Trdc8SeO4YMQdBVfLXyHgF+c2xBV9BWRnI8YpWS yVZfjHDptVXI2lhgXCsmw5Xk/owthD0LUse5JlZID5fk2jY2C4+hULdCCMUgKgpnAmZY AhXA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=sPgrZiPrzhYz4UKSw5g42yrbi13v/Dst2ZSCd3ebus4=; b=ooaGhkhIXCCpiy33yemlXLdaDu5ac425cS98Nv4v9Pr+49yvEl2apQQC6O42qQDsva r+wHZ7DqZ3dkLnzRlgOnc0/phHlEQT/u9a/sFm9L8vtCoTO/qMCTntSQ/I+MS/Rx5HZM W2lHUeGJ6hwYn3q/hXmTFhmspJpDse7eafPDIK3AOR1xMMwBX/cEBUYyDgyGDMd/Ytia 3BaGjdJ6SrWecUplZa1sEdNMkREk3naSCQmmGVqoyC2ctcqM2LsZ1DKZVuH23qaa97mZ tQRJ+cQLPHzcamVXmotCt5yUWxdW0XkhqjNRVBvQqhvUdebtJXICkZuYL05Wgs2em54W 2WkQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWcYrHYjQ5Fwi2m3rloaGWfIa9r42YcCZAqzzqjGLFoM3Dr7WWH EQHJAlnQJbJOQF562bozg8RWVHMp
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqziGUhuxT4xiCD6HB24FGms+5nd0gM9a7mBkA6Stz2pBwvcpu62rpf171eU3vQwRLnJeGND8g==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:5452:: with SMTP id d18mr2847801qtq.385.1573053589379; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 07:19:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2620::1004:4:e43e:7bd5:fae9:4128? ([2620:0:1004:4:e43e:7bd5:fae9:4128]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i75sm12847501qke.22.2019.11.06.07.19.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Nov 2019 07:19:48 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Subject: Re: Quality of Directorate reviews
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7d7b2541-c5b2-dbfc-e503-36fffc6fabeb@network-heretics.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:19:48 -0500
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2FBA1517-52B8-478B-95E4-ABDAF8C4A16C@gmail.com>
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> <7d7b2541-c5b2-dbfc-e503-36fffc6fabeb@network-heretics.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/U8KDi5q-GhmmacH-XoHJg-AtNds>
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 15:19:52 -0000


> On Nov 6, 2019, at 9:52 AM, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> 
> On 11/6/19 6:03 AM, Ralph Droms 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.
> 
> As long as working groups are as siloed as they are, this is unlikely any WG that affects interests that are outside of its narrow scope.   And it's very dangerous to assume that WGs are competent to produce high quality work in isolation at least with our current processes.   Though I'd certainly be in favor of some kind of explicit extra-WG review earlier in a WG's or document's lifespan.

We don't want to assume WGs are competent to produce high quality work, but we should certainly expect that they are.  WGs that regularly don't produce high quality work, perhaps, should not be supported in the IETF?
 
> 
> Keith
> 
>