Exactly ... this is precisely the reason why the procedure was designed. We need to close the ENUM WG.
And in most cases IMHO these are relatively trivial technical registrations. Personally as ENUM WG chair I would have preferred first come first serve with only expert review and no RFC but this was the consensus of the wG. -----Original Message----- From: Jason Livingood [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 25, 2010 9:04 AM To: Miguel A. Garcia; Peter Saint-Andre Cc: Bernie Hoeneisen; General Area Review Team; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Michelle Cotton; RFC Editor Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-enum-enumservices-guide-20.txt Miguel - To add to what Bernie already said, there actually won't be an ENUM WG at some point rather soon. So there will not in most cases be any WG review per se, another reason why expert review is called for. Jason On 6/25/10 3:46 AM, "Miguel A. Garcia" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24/06/2010 22:07, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> On 6/22/10 12:03 AM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote: >>>> Hi Peter: >>>> >>>> There are two aspects of this proposal: >>>> >>>> a) Whether IANA accepts the change in the process to bring the experts >>>> prior to modifications >>>> b) A sentiment that the RFC process, in particular the involvement of >>>> experts in the RFC process, is not enough. >> What do you mean by "not enough"? My understanding is that the IANA >> wants to avoid late surprises that might modify registrations specified >> in Internet-Drafts, and that they have collaborated with the RFC Editor >> team to define improved processes for dealing with such problems >> > > Well, if the I-D is cooked in a working group, then experts are involved > throughout the entire life of the I-D. If the I-D is an individual > submission that was not carefully reviewed in a working group, experts > come into the picture at a later stage, either through the review process > or any of the various reviews that the I-D will suffer, including IETF > LC, Gen-ART review, etc. > > So, in any case, I believe the draft is well reviewed when it lands to > IANA. I don't understand why IANA needs to change their process to bring > more experts to review the draft. It gives me the impression that the I-D > process does not suffer enough review and IANA can solve that problem. > > /Miguel > Regards, Jason Jason Livingood Executive Director Internet Systems Engineering National Engineering & Technical Operations Comcast Cable Communications 215-286-7813 [email protected] _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
