Hi Miguel
On Wed, 16 Jun 2010, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq
Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide-20.txt
Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[email protected]>
Review Date: 16-June-2010
IETF LC End Date:
IESG Telechat date: (if known)
Summary: The document is almost ready for publication as a BCP.
Major issues: none.
Minor issues:
- Section 6.5: The text reads:
IANA will conduct an "Expert Review" ...
I guess a designated expert will conduct the review. At most (specially for
non-RFC Specifications), IANA will make sure that an Expert Review has been
done.
We already decided to change this (after Alexey already reported this
one).
- Section 11.6.1 discusses the process of registering Enumservices through
the publication of an RFC. I don't understand the purpose of the second
paragraph, which chances the process to IANA. The text reads:
IANA MUST only add Enumservices to the Registry, if the experts have
approved the corresponding Enumservice Specification as to be
published. IANA SHOULD attempt to resolve possible conflicts arising
from this together with the experts. In case changes between the
approved and the to be published version are substantial, IANA MAY
reject the request after consulting the experts.
My problem is related to the process. If a document has gone through the RFC
publication process, I expect that experts have inspected the document and
approved the Specification prior to publication as an RFC, as part of a
regular RFC process. This process may differ between standard track RFCs and
individual submissions, but in any case, experts are involved in the RFC
publication process, and the RFC will not be published if experts voice
against the document. Or when do the authors expect that an Internet-Draft
could be published without expert review?
So, I think that for RFCs, IANA does not need to do anything different from
what they are doing today.
Before the document goes to the IETF process, the experts will review it.
Afterwards, it is not guaranteed that the experts remain in the process.
If there are no changes until the document arrives ar IANA, no problem. If
there are changes, IANA needs somebody to have a look at the latest
version.
We added this sentence to ensure the experts have a chance to verify
possible changes are fine in any case.
Note: Not too long time ago, there was a case where major flaws got
introduced as a result of the IESG processing. We noticed this during
auth48 and it was rather painful to handle this case.
I hope this addresses you concerns.
cheers,
Bernie
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
