> I am really surprised to not see some sort of requirement that
> we get a tech spec published within a reasonable amount of time.
> SO I would say:
> Potential Requirement: After IESG approval of a document,
> the IETF Technical Publisher must publish the document within
> 2 months (unless blocking issues come up during that period)
I agree. And to be clear, I'd want the time frames to be something
like:
SHOULD be published within 4 weeks, MUST be published within 8.
> Blocking issues would be non-response on AUTH48 ??
Yes.
> Or a normatibve reference not being available.
> or some such,
Actually, no.
This is probably getting beyond techspec, but over the years I have
become increasingly uncomfortable with documents that are approved
(i.e., in the RFC editor queue) but that are blocked on normative
references. Some reasons include:
- by definition, a document isn't complete without its normative
dependences. One cannot properly evaluate it without its
dependencies also being available for review. Indeed, in some
cases, text changes are needed in a document if one of its
normative dependencies changes.
- documents in the publication queue that are blocked tend to get
forgotten (by the WGs), reducing the pressure on getting the
normative dependencies completed. (Indeed, we want the exact
opposite!)
- I think we'd be better served having the equivalent of a new ID
tracker state called something like "approved, but blocked on
normative references", so that the document is clearly not in the
publication queue (yet).
Part of the reason for the above is to make it more clear that once a
document is in the publication queue, "blocking issues" should really
be rare exceptions.
Thomas
_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec
