Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RF
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- To: rfc-ed@ISI.EDU (RFC Editor)
- Subject: Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- From: Mohsen Banan <mohsen@neda.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:04:00 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: scoya@ietf.org, mtaylor@teledesic.com, JBCheng@attws-hq1.nwest.attws.com, pean@neda.com, postel@ISI.EDU, Mohsen Banan-neda <mohsen@neda.com>
- Content-Length: -918
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
- In-Reply-To: <199707291539.AA11953@zephyr.isi.edu>
- References: <199707291539.AA11953@zephyr.isi.edu>
>>>>> On Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:39:59 -0700, rfc-ed@ISI.EDU (RFC Editor) said: RFC-Editor> Steve: RFC-Editor> Can you please look into this situation? RFC-Editor> Thanks, RFC-Editor> Mary Kennedy RFC-Editor> Request for Comments Documents RFC-Editor> ------------------------------------- Something is terribly wrong here. This is the 4th time that we are requesting to find out the reason(s) for the delay in publication of ESRO protocol (submitted more than 6 months ago) as an Informational RFC. The RFC Editor/IESG has been delaying the publication of this RFC-to-be without providing any reason or explanation. Our repeated requests for an explanation keep being ignored. Such seeming dictatorial attitude and arrogance has no place in the open RFC publication process. It is the responsibility of the RFC Editor to facilitate wide distribution of relevant technical information. Delaying publication of an Informational (the simplest and fastest category) RFC for more than half a year without any reason is not serving the Internet technical community. The RFC publication process does not belong to a select few. The Informational classification in specific is intended to facilitate distribution of technical work coming from outside of the IETF/IESG context. Last week Mary Kennedy forwarded my message to Steve Coya (to which we have not received a reply) referring to it as "this situation". Well, this situation has two dimensions. 1) Publication of ESRO document. 2) RFC Editor's failure to follow the publication process. I care greatly about both. On the first point, there should be no further delays in publication of the ESRO document. Considering that the ESRO protocol was forwarded to IETF on January 23rd, and that there been ample opportunity for its review in the Memphis meeting and afterwards, any further delay (e.g., waiting for the Munich IETF) is unreasonable. Our goal in submission of this document for publication as an Informational RFC was to use a rapid and widely accessible publication mechanism, not for IETF/IESG rubber-stamping. On the second point, Section 4.2.3 of RFC-2026 (BCP-9) refers to a two weeks wait period and IESG's review within a reasonable period of time. Is 6 months considered reasonable period of time? We are in the process of doing significant additional work for wireless Internet users based on the ESRO protocol. We hope to make all of that work openly available as well. However, the unexplained delay that we have experienced in the case of this document have been quite discouraging. We have been counting on the adherence to the RFC publication process which appears to have failed in the case of this document. This is having a significant adverse impact on our progress. If the RFC Editor does not intend to publish our document in the next few days, I wish to escalate this matter. Please let us know (i) if there is an escalation process for this situation and, if so, (ii) what it is. In any case, I expect a prompt response from the RFC-Editor to the following questions. - What process is the RFC Editor following for the publication of Informational RFCs? - What do "reasonable period of time" and "timely" mean to the RFC Editor and the IESG. - What is the RFC Editor expected to do when the IESG does not review the document in a reasonable period of time? - Who do the RFC Editor and the IESG find themselves accountable to? Regards, -- Mohsen Banan Neda Communications, Inc. tel: +1-425-644-8026 17005 S.E. 31st Place fax: +1-425-562-9591 Bellevue, Wa 98008 E-Mail: mohsen@neda.com U.S.A. URL: http://www.neda.com/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- From: Steve Coya <scoya@ietf.org>
- Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- Replies
- Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol), RFC Editor
- Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol), RFC Editor
- Prev by Date: Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- Next by Date: Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- Prev by thread: Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- Next by thread: Re: Unexpected and Unreasonable delays in processing of Informational RFC (ESRO Protocol)
- Index(es):