IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpowr] Re: Getting Bad Ideas to Fail Early

"Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@mcsr-labs.org> Mon, 09 February 2004 04:18 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16590 for <mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 23:18:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq2rn-00011p-JG for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:17:51 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i194Hp1H003953 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 23:17:51 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq2rm-00011g-GU for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:17:50 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16550 for <mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 23:17:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq2rf-0004Iz-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:17:43 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq2qi-0004EB-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:16:45 -0500
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq2q2-0004AF-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:16:02 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq2q2-0000o1-HR; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:16:02 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Aq2pk-0000mx-SF for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:15:44 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA16472 for <mpowr@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Feb 2004 23:15:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq2pi-00048a-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:15:42 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq2ok-00043g-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:14:43 -0500
Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net ([216.148.227.85]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Aq2nw-0003wM-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sun, 08 Feb 2004 23:13:52 -0500
Received: from dfnjgl21 (c-24-1-97-129.client.comcast.net[24.1.97.129]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc12) with SMTP id <2004020904132301400hif74e> (Authid: sdawkins@comcast.net); Mon, 9 Feb 2004 04:13:23 +0000
Message-ID: <00a301c3eec3$11868d90$0400a8c0@DFNJGL21>
Reply-To: Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>
To: mpowr@ietf.org
References: <20040202044407.6E5AA77AA09@guns.icir.org>
Subject: Re: [mpowr] Re: Getting Bad Ideas to Fail Early
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:13:27 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr>, <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results <mpowr.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpowr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr>, <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I agree with Mark on each point. One note below.

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Allman" <mallman@icir.org>
To: <David.Partain@ericsson.com>
Cc: <mpowr@ietf.org>
Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2004 10:44 PM
Subject: Re: [mpowr] Re: Getting Bad Ideas to Fail Early


>
> David-
>
> Thanks for the note!  I think we are agreeing more than we are not.
I
> think that any sort of early review mechanism needs to be a "first
> class" IETF citizen.  It must explicitly have the respect and
backing of
> the IESG.  That's not to say that the IESG will always agree with
every
> review produced by some early review entity (whatever that might
look
> like).  But, the IESG has to buy into the early review process in a
way
> that everyone knows that the reviews do, in fact, carry some weight
and
> that they are to be taken seriously by WGs and WG chairs.  And, the
> expectation should be that issues raised during such reviews should
be
> dealt with before documents are forwarded to the IESG.  (And, of
course,
> if the WG / WG chair is having a problem working through these
issues
> the IESG should be willing to help manage that process.  But, that
is no
> different from the current system.)
>
> That said, I do not think that we need to assign any special
"authority"
> to these reviews.  For instance, I don't think such reviews would be
> more or less important than a high quality review received by a
random
> person who read an i-d and decided to send some comment on it.  All
> issues raised should be dealt with by the WG using due diligence.
The
> major change I see is in the more explcit gathering of reviews from
> different perspectives - not in any special status they might have.

Are we still talking about mechanisms to identify early reviewers? I
think such a mechanism is a significant, and important, change.

>
> My $0.02 for tonight.
>
> Thanks!
>
> allman


_______________________________________________
mpowr mailing list
mpowr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email