Danger to the Net? (Re: My thoughts about the problems of the IETF)

Margaret Wasserman mrw at windriver.com
Sun Apr 27 22:31:55 CEST 2003

At 08:48 PM 4/21/2003 -0400, John C Klensin wrote:
>I don't know if seven is the right number, but I have believed for some 
>time that many steps in the approval process would be improved if the 
>submission process from a WG to the IESG included a checklist document 
>that, in turn, included...

I tend to be a process oriented person, so I believe that
explicit acceptance criteria at several stages of document
development would improve document quality, accountability,

I think that a checklist with explicit (electronic) sign-off
that is required to pass a document to the IESG would be a useful
addition to the WG process.  I don't think it would create a lot
more work (we're supposed to be checking these things, anyway),
and it would help new or busy/distracted WG chairs to avoid
mistakes.  I can pretty much guarantee that there is no WG
chair who is intentionally sending bad documents to the IESG
in an effort to waste the IESG's time.

Of course, there is nothing stopping us (the WG chairs) from
developing our own checklist and using it if we like...


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list