Keith Moore wrote:
True. Which is why it's necessary to handle the reviews in a pipelined rather than a stop-and-wait fashion. But part of the reason IETF's process is so slow is that the
only meaningful checks we place are at the end - so a working group typically labors to the point of exhaustion without having received any external feedback, so when the feedback does arrive the working group is so dysfunctional that it's nearly incapable of fixing anything (and it is often in denial about what is wrong). Providing more early feedback will speed up the process rather than slow it down.
There's already a means for "external reviewers" to do so: read the drafts,
make comments, add issues to the issue tracker. It's really not rocket
science. Having some new sclerotic "pipeline" involved with the life
blood of a
working group sounds like a recipe for working group infarction to me.
Mike
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf