Subject: [Techspec] mankin-pub-req-06 available

From: "Stephen Hayes (TX/EUS)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:20:07 -0500

draft-mankin-pub-req-06 is available http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-mankin-pub-req-06.txt.  The changes were based upon the meeting comments and agreements as well as a few items received before the meeting and offline comments.  Feedback appreciated. Given that the timeline calls for last call starting April 15, rapid response is requested.

Stephen

1. In Figure 1: Stages of a Working Group Document, add IANA to the post approval column (but also keep it in the pre-approval column).

2. Section 3.7 Post Approval, Pre-Publication Technical Corrections.  Replaced "This should ideally be a rare occurrence, but as publication times increase, the number of minor technical improvements increases." with "This should ideally be a rare occurrence." since the last part could be read to imply an expected trend towards longer publication times.

3. Removed the reference and references to rfc2223bis.  Specifically:

Removed from section 2: "To allow progress on developing the process requirements, this document assumes the policies for document format, etc. as are currently defined in [1]."

Modified sections 3.1 and to say "This review should strive to maintain consistency in appearance with previously published documents." instead of referencing 2223bis.

4. Also removed the reference and references to proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding since it doesn't look like this will be referencable in time.

5. Modified Req-POSTCORR-2 to indicate that approved technical changes could come from the appropriate party (usually the shepherd, but sometimes the IESG).

6. In requirement	Req-PUBHELP-1 Added the following sentence at the end: "The technical publisher should follow IETF guidance in specifying documentation guidelines."  This is to make it clear that although it is the publisher who may prepare training materials, the IETF is the authority on those guidelines. 

7. Added new requirement:
Req-PUBHELP-3 - The IETF technical publisher shall provide a contact e-mail address and correspond as required to progress the publication work.  The publisher should address queries from both inside and outside of the IETF community.

8. Fuzzed the performance metrics section.  Now reworded to:

Req-TIMEFRAMES-1 - The consensus of the IETF community is that an average publication time of under a month is desirable.  It is understood that in some cases there will be delays outside of the publisher's control. The actual performance targets and metrics are expected to be determined as part of the contract negotiation process.

Req-TIMEFRAMES-2 - The consensus of the IETF community is that the time required for a pre-publication review should be under 10 days.  It is understood that in some cases there will be delays outside of the publisher's control. The actual performance targets and metrics are expected to be determined as part of the contract negotiation process.

Also removed the note about actual numbers determined in the contract since it was superfluous.

9. Add a steady state metric for throughput.  Added a new requirement:

Req-THROUGHPUT-3 - Although minor variations are expected, there should be no long term growth trend in the length of the publication queue.

Also added some text to Req-Stats-2 tying in the need to present historical trending data.

10. Removed the requirements associated with early permanent ID allocation.  

11. Removed the requirement associated with accepting input in xml2rfc.

12. Change the requirement for how the publisher deals with excessive or too late changes:
Req-POSTCORR-3 - The publisher should alert the IESG (or IAB or IRSG) when it feels that a requested change is unreasonable.  Further processing of the draft should be suspended pending a response by the IESG (or IAB or IRSG) on how to proceed.

13. Added a new requirement to purge a document from the index:
Req-INDEX-7 - The IETF can indicate to the publisher that it should purge a document from the index.  This should remove all traces of the document.

14. Added a note at the end of section 2.1 clarifying that a submission may actually consist of multiple source documents.
 
"Note that in some cases a single submission may actually consist of multiple source documents (supporting files, code, etc.)."

15. Removed all the Current and Potential prefixes for the requirements.

16. Correction of some typos, grammar, etc.

_______________________________________________
Techspec mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/techspec