So, for example, if the time between a document approved by the IESG
for publication, and the time the RFC was published, grew to five years,
that would not concern you?
No one is suggesting that we compromise quality for speed.
It's a process. Process cycle time is often one of two or
three most important measurements. Engineers optimize processes
all the time to improve cycle time. Reducing queue time is
one of the most productive ways to improve cycle time.
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Lloyd Wood [mailto:l(_dot_)wood(_at_)eim(_dot_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk]
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2001 8:26 AM
To: Rosen, Brian
Cc: 'Fred Baker'; Dave Crocker; Steven M. Bellovin; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: rfc publication suggestions
On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Rosen, Brian wrote:
I'd love to have a discussion of:
What do we WANT the queue time to be
What would we have to do to get it there
Editor queue time is not a meaningful engineering constraint, and we
shouldn't be optimising for it.
The IETF should not be organised around time to publication or time to
decisions.
L.
<L(_dot_)Wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>