Re: Future Enumservice Registration Process

Hi Folks,

(i)   Remember that the IESG decides who is to be designated as an  
expert.
       Thus they set up the pool of experts before any reviews even  
take place.
       Do they also have to assign an expert for each review as well  
before
       things begin? I think that options A & D assume that the IESG  
has too
       much time on its hands. Ha!

(ii)  I *hope* that your experience was a teething problem - looking  
at the
       comments, it seemed that a fair chunk of the early questions  
were asked
       for clarification from the WG that set up the 2929bis process  
rather
       being aimed at the draft authors. In effect, you were caught  
in the
       crossfire, and your expert couldn't progress until *those*  
questions
       were answered. That MAY be the price one pays for a less rigid  
process
       - it's initially chaotic. I would HOPE that we can learn from  
that.

(iii) <JOKE>
         Getting the expert's attention: bribery may work - it  
usually does.
         Have you considered employing said expert, or sponsoring an  
IETF meeting?
       </JOKE>
       Seriously, folks ...
       What do we expect of volunteers, especially ones who are  
assigned by someone
       else (based on that expert's availability) to review a draft?
       The expert so assigned may not have a lot of domain knowledge,  
and frankly
       may not all that interested in the environment that has driven  
a need for
       this registration.

(iv)  IMHO, there *has* to be a ML, and someone (who has close  
understanding of
       the kind of things that will come up in registrations) with  
the responsibility
       to select an appropriate sucker//////volunteer expert to  
review work when it
       is ready to be considered.

       The trick is - when is something "ready", who gets to decide,  
and how are they
       anointed so that they can convince one of a pool of designated  
experts to spend
       his or her own time on document review?

       Whoever it is, please don't upset him/her - your urgent bright  
idea may never
       get through the process.

all the best,
   Lawrence



On 4 Nov 2007, at 17:57, Otmar Lendl wrote:

> On 2007/11/02 16:11, Richard Shockey <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Bernie this is a excellent summary of the options.
>>
>> Chair hat off ... I lean toward Plan B.
>>
>> The registration proceeds directly to the expert review via a  
>> special email
>> list like we see with URI's. The expert review deals with it in a
>> "reasonable" time frame and forwards its report to the IESG for  
>> ultimate
>> approval.
>
> As I had the pleasure of test-driving 2929bis, I don't like B.
>
> The reason is that hard to guarantee SLAs from experts. In that
> case, what happens if the exports don't react in the given time frame?
> What happens in that case?
>
> When everything works as planned, all four processes are fine.
> The things we should have an eye on are the faultlines. What
> happens if something doesn't go according to plan?
>
> /ol
> -- 
> / Otmar Lendl <[email protected]>, T: +43 1 5056416 - 33, F: - 933 \
> | nic.at Internet Verwaltungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft m.b.H |
> \ http://www.nic.at/  LG Salzburg, FN 172568b, Sitz: Salzburg /
>
> _______________________________________________
> enum mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum