Concluded WG Improved Cross-Area Review (icar)
Note: The data for concluded WGs is occasionally incorrect.
| WG | Name | Improved Cross-Area Review | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acronym | icar | ||
| Area | General Area (gen) | ||
| State | Concluded | ||
| Charter | charter-ietf-icar-01 Approved | ||
| Document dependencies | |||
| Additional resources | Additional ICAR Web Page | ||
| Personnel | Chairs | Joel M. Halpern, Mark Allman | |
| Area Director | Russ Housley | ||
| Mailing list | Address | icar@ietf.org | |
| To subscribe | icar-request@ietf.org | ||
| Archive | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/icar |
Final Charter for Working Group
The WG will work out mechanisms for improved cross-functional
review within the IETF, addressing the issues identified by the
PROBLEM WG. This includes a better community review, as well as
more structured pre-IESG review that may be used to improve
scalability of the IESG review function.
Definitions:
o Cross-functional review: document review covering different
aspects of Internet technology, including those represented by
WGs within different IETF areas.
o Community review: document review performed by individual IETF
participants and not caused by their responsibilities within
the IETF management structure.
o Structured review: more formal and role-based document review
performed by individuals assuming certain responsibilities (such
as by WG chairs, directorate and IESG members.)
It is an explicit goal of the WG to come up with mechanisms
encouraging early review of the documents while ideas are still
in the formation stage. An early review is best for catching
architectural problems while they're still relatively easy to
solve. In particular, many cross-functional interactions can be
spotted and dealt with, thus avoiding many "late surprises". A
final review (currently done by the IESG) can catch remaining
cross-functional interactions, as well as deal with overall
quality issues.
The WG will cooperate with others in starting and evaluating
experiments with early community and structured reviews. The
evaluation of such experiments may be published as Informational
RFCs if the group so desires.
The WG will also coordinate with other WGs involved in the IETF
reform process on proposed changes to the IETF Working Group
operations and Standards process if those are considered
necessary.
Milestones
| Date | Milestone | Associated documents |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 2005 | Evaluate WG progress and potential; close or recharter | |
| Sep 2004 | Submit draft on improved structured review to the IESG for publication as BCP | |
| Sep 2004 | Submit draft on improved community review to the IESG for publication as BCP |
Done milestones
| Date | Milestone | Associated documents |
|---|---|---|
| Done | Publish Internet Drafts on improved community and structured reviews |