Hi Dale,
At 07:20 08-11-2011, Worley, Dale R (Dale) wrote:
Well, all of the *drafts* for these WGs have to be published by now,
as I-D submission has been cut off.  So you can review them.

I predict that there will be a flood of I-Ds on Monday. The availability of I-D issue is not specific to the WGs mentioned in my previous message.

I think you are concerned that there is no public notice of *which*
documents *need to be reviewed* for the session, so it is no help to
know that the document is available to read if you knew that you
needed to read it.

I would not rate it as a concern as that's too strong. I'll attempt to provide a different perspective. Let's assume that I will be following the forthcoming meeting. As I am new to the IETF, I'll go to www.ietf.org to find the agenda ( https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/82/agenda.html ). After going through the agenda for the WGs I follow, I see that I have some spare time which I could put to use by identifying interesting work being done in other WGs or areas. As Websex sounds interesting, I read the agenda to check out the drafts as the WG Chairs will likely ask "who has read this draft". There are three drafts [1]:

 (i)   draft-ietf-websec-strict-transport-sec-01
 (ii)  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-evans-palmer-hsts-pinning/
 (iii) draft-hodges-websec-framework-reqs-00

During the WG session, I find out that I read an old version of the I-Ds.

I could pick other examples. Note that publishing an agenda or submitting an I-D before the submission cut-off does not mean that people will read all that. The point is to give people adequate time to identify and review what will be discussed.

Regards,
-sm

1. Two of these I-Ds have already been revised and the reference for one of them is not stable.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to