The problem is, the ADs are very busy people, and their expertise has to
cover a wide range of topics, so there will be few IESG members who can
really understand a subtle issue. Document reviews outside of one's
subject area are very difficult and require considerable focus. GIven
that, even if only one AD catches a flaw in a document, there's a good
chance (though not a certainty of course) that it's something that warrants
more attention. It's far more likely that no ADs will find the flaw
My point isn't that I expect multiple ADs to find the same problem
initially. What I expect to happen is that, say, Keith finds a flaw
and lodges a DISCUSS position. It's discussed, and the WG insists
that it's not a problem and shouldn't be changed. Keith maintains the
DISCUSS, and it's gone over on the telechat. At the end of that,
Keith still maintains the DISCUSS. More discussion among Keith, the
responsible AD, and the WG ensues, and it's still not resolved -- the
WG still refuses to change the spec, and Keith still maintains the
DISCUSS position.
It's at THAT stage that at least one other AD should have read the
document, read Keith's DISCUSS position, and agreed with Keith.
That's not a very high bar. And *that* is where I say that if there's
still no one backing Keith's DISCUSS, even with his *asking* other ADs
to have a look, Keith needs to back down.
Barry
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf