ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Purpose of IESG Review

2013-04-13 03:13:40
On 12/04/2013 14:17, Fred Baker (fred) wrote:
On Apr 12, 2013, at 12:13 AM, Brian E Carpenter 
<brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:

Seeing randomly selected drafts as a Gen-ART reviewer, I can
say that serious defects quite often survive WG review and
sometimes survive IETF Last Call review, so the final review
by the IESG does serve a purpose.
I'm not saying it doesn't serve a purpose. I'm saying that I know of drafts 
that have been nearly rewritten during such back-and-forth, so what popped out 
was largely unrelated to what went in. In such cases, I think the document 
should have been returned to the working group with comments, not worked on 
privately.

Fred

The Discusses and Comments are public, all versions of the draft are public, the authors and chairs (who are usually the shepherds) see all the review emails. Now maybe the IESG need to be more pro-active in sending drafts back to the WG, although that may also be unpopular, but if an author, shepherd or chair made that request I can think of few circumstances where an AD that would likely refuse.

- Stewart


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>