My thoughts about the problems of the IETF

[Bound, Jim]

Open process is key.  But what does that mean and why is it open?  That
has to be documented as an RFC I think down the road.  This will avoid
also any perception or reality of stacking the deck.

/jim

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian at hursley.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2003 10:48 AM
> To: erosen at cisco.com
> Cc: problem-statement at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: My thoughts about the problems of the IETF
> 
> 
> Eric Rosen wrote:
> > 
> > > two ways that outside reviewers might help reduce workload:
> > 
> > > 1. require all documents to have N favorable outside 
> reviews, each 
> > > from an IESG-appointed reviewer pool, before going to IESG review
> > 
> > > 2. provide that any document which has more than Z unfavorable 
> > > reviews from the reviewer pool need not be considered by IESG
> > 
> > This has the obvious problem that the IESG could stack the pool of 
> > reviewers so  as  to  achieve any  goal  they  want,  and  there  
> > would be  even  less accountability than there is today.
> 
> Obviously, we would adopt an open process for choosing the 
> pool of reviewers. I would also be in favour of the reviews 
> being posted on ietf.org.
> 
>    Brian
>