IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: "Per Area" and "Per AD" review ballots?

Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com> Thu, 26 March 2015 18:12 UTC

Return-Path: <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D12751A9094 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:12:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 nxPwv_mwIUBh for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com [64.89.234.25]) (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 705331A88F3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:12:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from webmail.nominum.com (cas-03.win.nominum.com [64.89.235.66]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.nominum.com", Issuer "Go Daddy Secure Certificate Authority - G2" (verified OK)) by sjc1-mx02-inside.nominum.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 571D6DA013C; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:12:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:1231:998:8d90:4e3f:38a0:1681] (31.130.238.58) by CAS-03.WIN.NOMINUM.COM (192.168.1.100) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Thu, 26 Mar 2015 11:12:02 -0700
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: "Per Area" and "Per AD" review ballots?
From: Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
In-Reply-To: <55143567.8060800@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:12:00 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <F08A8BAA-744B-4CAF-BB65-3AE213347C97@nominum.com>
References: <CAKKJt-cjQgvuGkwFvCu5ELQEw9sbrYhVMP+xgujcKPLps7VRJg@mail.gmail.com> <55143567.8060800@gmail.com>
To: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Originating-IP: [31.130.238.58]
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/YpKliKml9TvUO7jWnxnlD-jsluo>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 18:12:05 -0000

On Mar 26, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is there a real problem here?

Speaking for myself, it would have been helpful to have had a clearer sense of what to look at and what not to waste my time on early on.   I got a solid reality check from Stewart Bryant about this midway through my first year, but it took well into my second year to really figure out which drafts to review closely and which to skim.   However, I think it's worth having ADs skim drafts so that they can notice cross-area issues, and for that to work they either have to be able to ballot, or else they have to use peer pressure.   I think being able to ballot is probably better.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email