Re: Future Enumservice Registration Process

On 2007/11/05 00:11, lconroy <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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!

IMHO you need someone whose daily business is to shepherd processes.
Bug people into responsing, keeping track of procedures and deadlines,
in other words, be a bloody (but functional) bureaucracy.

I don't think the IESG is setup for such a job. Let them approve
the process and appoint the expert, but keep them off the critical
path for the actual process as far as possible.

The IANA sounds like a better choice to me, i.e. option C.

> (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.

I don't complain about my experience. It just exposed one design
criterium: Don't just plan how the process works when everybody
cooperates, but also what happens when someone is not doing his job.

> (iii) 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.

Yep: that's why the registration procedure needs to contain more
than

* A submits proposal to X
* X does Y within Z days
* If Y approves, B will publish 
* ...

Like any good programming, we need to check for error conditions when 
designing the algorithm:

* A submits proposal to X
* X does Y within Z days. On timeout, X can appeal to ...
* If Y approves, B will publish 
* ...

/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 /