Re: [nfsv4] rfc5666bis and rpcrdma-bidirection progress update

[Benjamin Kaduk <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 06:23:43AM -0500, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> 
> Shepharding is just prompting the IESG to get the items on their
> agenda.  It shouldn't take more than one person....

I must disagree that shepherding is "just prompting the IESG".  See, for example,
https://www.ietf.org/iesg/template/doc-writeup-qa-style.html, which includes
several questions that should be answered by the shepherd (if relevant for the
document at hand).  In particular, the shepherd should provide a summary of
the WG review process, whether there was controversy about various points, etc.;
when there are many documents in the WG and the WG review was spread out over
time, this can involve reviewing the entire mailing list archive of the document's
discussions, which does take a noticable amount of time.
It also implies that the shepherd should perform validation of the sections
of the document written in formal language such as XDR, BNF, etc..

-Ben