Re: Liaison handling (Re: IAB comments on draft-baker-liaisons-00.txt)

[Stephen J Trowbridge <sjtrowbridge@lucent.com>]

James,
I think this is why Fred wanted that liaisons requiring a reply
be registered in the ID Tracker. This keeps due dates visible, and
I believe has a tickler function built in.

We did consider a fully manual process: basically an extension of
what is there with statements@ietf.org where we would include
some extra info (purpose, due date, responsible person) on the
web page with a manual tickler function from the secretariat.
This would meet the need, but if it can be automated, so much the
better.
Regards,
Steve

On 8/28/2003 11:26 AM, James Kempf wrote:
> I agree with this, but I think the Secretariat needs to be involved somehow
> to keep track. Individual liason representatives sometimes get overburdened
> and might load shed by delaying a response longer than is polite or
> desirable. Having a ping from someone to remind them, then a further ping to
> the IESG as the IETF management body if the individual liason continues to
> not respond expeditiously, might help to insure a more focus.
> 
>             jak
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Scott Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>
> To: <fred@cisco.com>; <harald@alvestrand.no>; <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
> Cc: <iab@ietf.org>; <iesg@ietf.org>; <sjtrowbridge@lucent.com>;
> <sob@harvard.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 12:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Liaison handling (Re: IAB comments on
> draft-baker-liaisons-00.txt)
> 
> 
> 
>>>Since Scott has been part of the process that produced this document, I
>>>must assume that Scott thinks that this process will help him, in ways
>>
> that
> 
>>>the current "statements@ietf.org" mechanism cannot. Scott, can you
>>
> confirm
> 
>>>that?
>>
>>yes but
>>
>>yes - I think it would help to have this process
>>
>>but - there is one other thing that I think would help and that is to
>>more clearly clearly define who is responsible at an orginizational
>>level in the IETF to ensure an answer happens when an answer should
> 
> happen.
> 
>>during the IESG discussion on this general topic it was suggested that the
>>person with organizational responsibility should be the person designated
>>by the IAB as the liaison to the organization that sent a particular
>>statement - this makes sense to me
>>
>>I did bring the idea up when we were developing this document but
>>did not push it as much maybe I should have
>>
>>Scott
>>
>>
> 
>