- From: Jim Whitehead <ejw@cse.ucsc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 21:40:13 -0800
- To: <ietf-dav-versioning@w3.org>
> Then the IESG will make a final determination > "in a timely fashion" after the last call period expires, > whether or not to approve the standards action, and will > notify the IETF via the mailing list of its decision. > > (No public voting ... it is the IESG that decides, but they > can ask for outside reviewers if they decide that is appropriate). In particular, it is my understanding that voting in the IESG is such that IESG members who have not reviewed the specification generally abstain. However, it only takes one yes vote, from an IESG member who has reviewed the specification, to allow the specification to move forward. Thus, once the specification finishes IESG last call, the critical path then becomes the review by at least one of the IESG members. Typically, the IESG member who reviews a specification is the working group's area director. In theory the review can go quickly, but in practice this tends to take several months (this is what Larry Masinter is referring to with his "square of the length of the spec." rule of thumb). Once the AD review is complete, there are generally a small number of issues that must be addressed by the working group before the AD will give it a yes vote in an IESG meeting. Feedback from the AD does not typically affect the core data model or abstractions provided by the protocol, but this is, in theory, possible. After the working group addresses these comments from the AD (and incorporates any other changes that have accumulated during the wait), and submits a new I-D, the IESG then reviews the document. - Jim
Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 00:41:08 UTC