Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed

["David Harrington" <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

A few questions.

Is there any progress on 
"RSVP-Directorate-Reviews describes the current guidelines for RSVP
directorate reviewers"?
It would be good to have some consistency to review criteria about
whether a proposal is "worthy".
Will you build this interacively using a wiki, or is somebody going to
take an action item to do this?

How will recommendations about which WG should consider adopting the
drafts be made?
which criteria will be used to justify a recommendation for passing a
draft to a specific WG?
It will obviously be a WG choice to decide whether to adopt a draft.
So will you recommendation be made to the suthor "we think you should
take it to WG XXX" or to the WG "we think the WG should look at draft
XXX, because we think the draft is worthy of considerations and we
think it fits within your WG scope"?

Can we make sure that reviews and supporting documents get posted to
the rsvp-dir archive?
is the rsvp-dir archive private or public?

dbh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail] 
> [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Bruce Davie
> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 1:05 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [rsvp-dir] RSVP directorate formed
> 
> Gorry,
>  I have asked the directorate to start by looking at 3 drafts 
> that have been proposed as WG items:
> 
> draft-narayanan-tsvwg-rsvp-resource-sharing-02 
> 
> draft-lefaucheur-tsvwg-rsvp-multiple-preemption-02.txt
> draft-polk-tsvwg-intserv-multiple-tspec-03.txt
> 
> In response to some questions from Bob Briscoe, I then asked 
> all the authors to provide short justifications for why their 
> drafts should be adopted (I can pass these on to you if that 
> would be helpful).
> 
> With that information in hand, I have asked the directorate 
> to try to get some reviews done before the upcoming meeting.
> 
> Unfortunately, I am unable to attend the meeting in 
> Maastricht. I agree, it would be great if one of the other 
> directorate members were to introduce our little team in the 
> meeting. Any volunteers?
> 
> Bruce
> 
> 
> On Jul 8, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Hello RSVP directorate!
> > 
> > Now that a directorate exists, I'd like help in two ways to 
> manage the RSVP work in TSVWG:
> > 
> > 1) I'm assuming that you will help with selecting 
> appropriate work for adoption of TSVWG (as per the top bullet 
> below). How do you see this working, specifically there are a 
> number of drafts that currently have not become work items - 
> despite author pleas - while we waited for clarification of 
> how to handle RSVP work. Undoubtedly I'll be asked if these 
> can become work items. As usual I'll push-back on need to do 
> the work, and people to review/contribute to the drafts. Are 
> there current drafts know to the directorate that would seem 
> ready and important enough that the WG should consider taking 
> these on?
> > 
> > 2) Would someone from the directorate like to say "hi we're 
> here and this is our remit" - taht would be helpful in the 
> tsvwg meeting!
> > 
> > Gorry
> > 
> >> At 08:01 AM 5/10/2010, Lars Eggert wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>> 
> >>> following the discussion during the IETF-77 TSVAREA 
> meeting on how to better review and progress extensions to 
> (non-TE) RSVP and IntServ, the transport area directors have 
> formed a new RSVP directorate and given it these tasks:
> >>> 
> >>>  * Review of all new work related to RSVP and Integrated 
> Services that
> >>>    is proposed for IETF adoption. The purpose of this review is
to
> >>>    advise the ADs and the chairs of the Transport Area 
> Working Group
> >>>    (TSVWG) on whether a particular proposal should be 
> taken on as a
> >>>    work item. The directorate will continue to guide and 
> review such
> >>>    new work in TSVWG until it is ready for publication as an
RFC.
> >>> 
> >>>  * Review of selected documents during IETF last call or 
> under IESG
> >>>    review. The directorate monitors ongoing IETF work and should
> >>>    independently decide when a document will benefit from 
> their review,
> >>>    assign a reviewer and enter into a follow-on 
> discussion with the
> >>>    authors. When deemed necessary, the area directors 
> will on occasion
> >>>    directly consult the directorate while forming their opinion
on
> >>>    selected documents being under review by the IESG.
> >>> 
> >>>  * Cross-working group review. RSVP documents may have 
> relevance to
> >>>    several working groups, including TSVWG and MPLS-related
groups
> >>>    such as MPLS WG and CCAMP WG. The directorate will ensure
that
> >>>    drafts submitted to TSV WG are reviewed in the 
> appropriate MPLS-related
> >>>    WGs if necessary, and will bring drafts from the 
> MPLS-related WGs
> >>>    to the attention of the TSV WG as appropriate.
> >>> 
> >>> The directorate can be reached at [e-mail]. 
> Additional information about the directorate is at 
> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/tsv/trac/wiki/RSVP-Directorate.
> >>> 
> >>> Lars
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > rsvp-dir mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rsvp-dir mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rsvp-dir