Re: WG Chairs Training

["Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>]

In message <5.1.0.14.2.20030318080602.03ac0b08@mail.windriver.com>, Margaret Wa
sserman writes:
>
>Hi John,
>
>At 06:35 AM 3/18/2003 +0200, john.loughney@nokia.com wrote:
>>Slide 6, are authors responsible in ensuring that drafts
>>submitted to the ADs/IESG meet IETF last call criterial
>>(for example, ensuring that ID Nits have been cleaned-up)?
>
>I think that the answer to this question is 'yes'.  I also
>agree that this is missing from the materials.  I added it
>verbally in the session today.
>
>IMO, WG chairs are responsible (directly or through
>delegation) for making sure that the documents that they
>submit to the IESG are consistent with I-D Nits and the
>RFC editors submission guidelines, as well as being
>relavent, technically sound, complete and useful (as
>appropriate for the type/level of document).

More precisely -- the responsible AD is supposed to enforce the nits via
the chairs, and therefore the chairs are supposed to enforce it on 
their authors.  In an idea world, the authors would handle it; the next 
step is that the chairs should review documents for conformance before 
asking the AD to advance them.


		--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb (me)
		http://www.wilyhacker.com (2nd edition of "Firewalls" book)