Re: registries and designated experts
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 13 June 2012 00:43 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 0331611E809C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:43:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sprn+e5BXHWH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:43:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (bsa2.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0177B11E8098 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 17:43:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.115] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1SebZt-000Iwf-68; Tue, 12 Jun 2012 20:36:53 -0400
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 20:43:11 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Subject: Re: registries and designated experts
Message-ID: <4F370B3BC882A87C8DE601A1@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2ipewdpgo.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <4FCDD499.7060206@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4FCDE96E.5000109@cs.tcd.ie> <4FD7083A.6080502@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4FD74FFC.3050905@stpeter.im> <6.2.5.6.2.20120612073602.09c8cbb8@resistor.net> <4FD786DC.4090403@gmail.com> <B416CA36462A3CA8C721BDF5@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <m2ipewdpgo.wl%randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Cc: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
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, 13 Jun 2012 00:43:18 -0000
--On Wednesday, June 13, 2012 09:29 +0900 Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote: >> (1) When a document specifies "Expert Review" for a registry, >> it should be required to spell out the criteria the Expert is >> supposed to use, at least to the degree that isn't obvious. >> If it doesn't, that should be grounds for "DISCUSS until >> fixed". > > given our reknown abilities to predict and understand the > future, this is going to work out really well. </dripping > sarcasm> > > of course, any known non-obvious gotchas are worth passing > along. but if they are non-obvious to the expert, then i > suspect they will also have been non-obvious to the doc > author(s). > > there may be a reason we have not automated this. I agree with your basic point, but I wasn't suggesting automation nor predicting the future. I was suggesting that giving the expert some guidance about what she is supposed to look for (if that isn't obvious) and, e.g., whether the default action on a marginal application is to accept or deny would be of some help, at least to the expert's sanity. Taking that comment as an example, I am _not_ suggesting that we try to define the boundaries of "marginal application". I also trust the IESG to make reasonable appointments in at least the vast majority of cases and assume that these will continue to be "Expert Reviewers" rather than, e.g., "Robot Reviewers" or "Moron Reviewers". Contrary to some other comments, it is not at all clear to me that having clear guidance will be of a lot of help to applicants in predicting outcomes. It would be nice if it happened, but my main aspiration would be to reduce confusion on the part of the expert about the expectations of the community. Put differently, I don't much like oral traditions, especially secret ones, in bodies like the IETF. But I'm also in favor of good sense as a primary guideline here. john
- APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07 Martin J. Dürst
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07 Stephen Farrell
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07 … Martin J. Dürst
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07 … Stephen Farrell
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Stephen Farrell
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Stephen Farrell
- registries and designated experts (was: Re: APPSD… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: registries and designated experts Dave Crocker
- Re: registries and designated experts (was: Re: A… Barry Leiba
- Re: registries and designated experts (was: Re: A… SM
- Re: registries and designated experts Brian E Carpenter
- Re: registries and designated experts John C Klensin
- Re: registries and designated experts SM
- Re: registries and designated experts Randy Bush
- Re: registries and designated experts John C Klensin
- Re: registries and designated experts (was: Re: A… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: registries and designated experts Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: registries and designated experts Randy Bush
- Re: registries and designated experts Brian E Carpenter
- RE: registries and designated experts Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: registries and designated experts Thomas Narten
- Re: registries and designated experts ned+ietf
- Re: registries and designated experts John C Klensin
- Re: registries and designated experts Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: registries and designated experts Dave Crocker
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Stephen Farrell
- Re: registries and designated experts Martin J. Dürst
- Re: registries and designated experts Stephen Farrell
- Re: registries and designated experts Martin J. Dürst
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Graham Klyne
- Re: registries and designated experts Graham Klyne
- Re: APPSDIR review of draft-farrell-decade-ni-07,… Graham Klyne