[Internal-cg] IETF response to ICG
joseph.alhadeff at oracle.com
Wed Jan 7 13:21:23 UTC 2015
I suggest that we have reviewers for each proposal that include
technical savvy and less technical oriented reviewers - to make sure
that technical nuances may be appropriately considered? The next two
weeks are tight but I can volunteer where needed. May I suggest that we
need to spread out across all the submissions... Names seems to have
the greatest gravitational attraction for obvious reasons...
On 1/6/2015 6:45 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
> That there is some amount of reading to do is probably a feature in all proposals,
> at least if they point to existing mechanisms described elsewhere or describe
> new mechanisms with a reasonable level of detail.
> No one said the ICG job was going to be easy :-) And while I’d probably classify
> our task more in the category of ensuring the proposals fulfil the criteria and can
> fit to the rest of the system than determining if they are satisfactory to us, in any case
> there will be some reading and proposal-understanding ahead all of us. Unless
> the rest of you already understand everything, I certainly do not...
> If there’s anything that the IETF team can do to help provide information
> or explain wrt our arrangements, let us know.
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Internal-cg