IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: To "lose the argument in the WG"

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 15 February 2017 08:00 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.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 7F201128B37 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:50 -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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 IZHnLKpwRMch for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr0-x241.google.com (mail-wr0-x241.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::241]) (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 D3689128AC9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr0-x241.google.com with SMTP id c4so4663671wrd.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:48 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=kn6yhiwGxTUBssLGgsAsu2U9Zp0YKgvLk7roxk4yJH0=; b=XXV722UtBMFmxuY6qc8OxIBV03+u/Nw4P+Zgix5fgFbRRRpP/B7s3LwtnMzE0XlLCH /VRwTI5nS2Ttnsxf/kT9IyuehQJRMUo7UzrEXIzygiVvNG2QBiqm4GR91WZfWuFm57J7 +XasFDh/Zf/D808vvwkDfC1nJT7qXCrfUpIL7oqBRpAqthTF6QlvbNImk8dvDWL7WbdF Q5av9DWpFLjUEnFq0cBdkVZ6jpOC9QhcCteQ0/eKtszy+DiELItJEt3nGLxNgYp/v9UJ dIlt5fxvAWiguj3+6xDvWVGWHiZLhfqsRZyff4zZPQNHbUCBHFtmphwa40jDKkDjdlj/ rn5Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=kn6yhiwGxTUBssLGgsAsu2U9Zp0YKgvLk7roxk4yJH0=; b=T7oke79FiuyAgjmBcRP6EJvvqnhOKCq0hqtD8kt6YiyKj+Rl7PBb63Ekzg9pKCBsoX cle+VILih4QfMK0Xmj+wE3DRz4vwIjFLozp2YuBpq0NhkYQn0fPPNueu6gkOJ0BNgoGk mE5cp2CtNH8FoC2giQ/B0NlFEQEd3S98ACjPcFJ/n2cmbUdlkvpZU8EVmlfaw6tfi01M II4Q5NTkVImXwtFyiWPswTqitkHauAJzq3b4/u1WQkLxCmBaTdI2LAHllB5ba6oXfJZS hLJoxsfZ872jLwFYQjYwSo+hKnl3DffT3PrUL9kf2wdH2Tf8sujljjxOtw1FSWgH7Pqr D4RQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39m41uPR969yFhvOkwiRiVuMmkDSeefEkjDnwMx3k79ue30mhMrYeum3CFnvZKuiXQ==
X-Received: by 10.223.169.164 with SMTP id b33mr30727218wrd.132.1487145647388; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.137.219] ([176.12.228.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y30sm3792603wrc.23.2017.02.15.00.00.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Feb 2017 00:00:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <E23DB7CC-BFDD-48B7-B655-8FD3461FDEE8@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1FFCEDFB-3924-4E00-A5B2-7EACCC438BF6"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: To "lose the argument in the WG"
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 10:00:35 +0200
In-Reply-To: <4965a53f-1e45-b444-1430-7d56ac413d50@joelhalpern.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
References: <66A86016-0382-4B2C-B9E8-30638237CB68@qti.qualcomm.com> <00e13499-7cea-a79a-7de1-dd9bad4bc530@dcrocker.net> <20170214060156.73B32639AEDF@rock.dv.isc.org> <0A3B2FF0-8F1C-430E-B4ED-DFA4CDB1FDB3@gmail.com> <0FB75520-E0BA-453C-8CF6-9F2D05B95FD6@fugue.com> <76d4aff3-760c-b258-a4e5-426ba69923f7@dcrocker.net> <9e0de86c-ceb3-8d05-8191-bdfd68521f00@gmail.com> <p0624060ad4c94966bc39@[99.111.97.136]> <4965a53f-1e45-b444-1430-7d56ac413d50@joelhalpern.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/aAtdpjZHnoioHjoueBMXyYCUgKs>
Cc: Randall Gellens <rg+ietf@randy.pensive.org>, IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 15 Feb 2017 08:00:50 -0000

In case it isn’t widely known, there is a button on the datatracker page for the draft ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-something-or-other ) that says “Request review”.

Click that and request from any of the 8 review teams.

Yoav

> On 15 Feb 2017, at 2:06, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
> 
> There is a procedure (that I thought was pretty widely known) that allows chairs to request early cross-are review when they think it is helpful.  I know that several of the review teams support this.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 2/14/17 6:56 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
>> At 12:18 PM +1300 2/15/17, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> 
>>> 2. As a Gen-ART reviewer I've often seen drafts at IETF LC that
>>> really *need* a general, in-depth review.
>> 
>> As a document author, I appreciate the area reviews done by GEN, SEC,
>> etc.  However, I think they would be just as useful and perhaps more
>> timely if done during WGLC (assuming the WG does a WGLC).
>> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email