RE: [owner-aaa-doctors@ops.ietf.org: BOUNCE aaa-doctors@ops.ietf. org: Non-member submission from [Ralph Droms <rdroms@cisco.com>]]

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Margaret writes:

> > >It is fine if people want to review Ralph's and John's responses,
> > >but I would prefer that we do not have an extended discussion of
> > >these issues on this closed list.  Somehow, we need to get this
> > >discussion onto the DHCP WG mailing list where it belongs.
> > >
> > >Margaret
> 
> Maybe we need to wait for Bert to get back from vacation to clarify his
> intent for the AAA Doctors process.  I thought that the function of the
> AAA Doctors was as an advisory panel to the O&M Area Directorate.  The
> ADs may utilize the comments from the AAA Doctors in forming their own
> comments on documents during the IESG review period.  I don't think it
> was intended that the AAA Doctor comments would be fed directly back
> into the WG for review, but indirectly via the AD comments.   
> Of course the AAA Doctors might be requested to review documents while 
> in WG last call (or earlier), and that would be different.  It may also
> be desirable, in terms of the timeliness of comments.
> 

I had hoped (and still hope) that the AAA-doctors would function very 
similar to the MIB-doctors. That means that the team of AAA-doctors would
be reviewing documents from AAA point of view and make sure for 
consistency and re-use whenever possible.

It is then also my expectation/hope that such comments can be fed back to
the appropriate WG and be discussed there.  And then hopefully we come to 
an acceptable solution for everyone.

If issues are raised that already have been discussed by the WG at the 
time the AAA-doctors do a review, then it might be good to summarize the 
standpoints that have been raised and to explain why AAA doctors still
believe that the issue is serious enough that one (or more) AD(s) should
take an issue. We can then take our responsibility and evaluate if we
(ADs) want to support that position or not.

Hope this helps/explains.

So from Ralph's posting, it sounded as if all issues had been discussed
already. Do any AAA-doctors believe that the discussions were not processed
or handled properly? Or is it that we have a different point of view that
seems to not be in sync with the (claimed) WG consensus?

Bert
> -- Dave
> 
> 
>