Subject: (repost) Reminder for review of Design Guidelines document

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:57:25 +0200

We've had one review so far.  More would be better.

  The guidelines document was updated significantly to address the open
concerns.  The latest revision is available at:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-radext-design-12

  The high-level differences are an update as per the review from
Hannes.  The outline is now:

introduction	(2 pages)
guidelines	(3 pages)
rationale	(11 pages)

  The "guidelines" section gives the guidelines with no supporting
arguments.  All of the arguments are in the "rationale" section.  We
hope that this organization makes the guidelines easier to understand.

  The document still needs some minor editing, and also should integrate
comments from Issue #327.  However, these changes are expected to be
minor, and we are looking for feedback on the current draft.

  A diff is at:

http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-radext-design-12.txt

  The diff isn't that useful, as too much has changed.

  Alan DeKok.

--
to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>

---

From: Bernard Aboba <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:42:08 -0700

The changes made in -12 largely relate to the organizational issues brought up by Hannes. 

Therefore it would appear that Issue 327 remains open, and possibly some of the concerns expressed by Avi and others relating to Issue 325. 

As a result, it would appear that there is still WG consensus against publication of the document. 

> Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:57:25 +0200
> From: [email-masked]
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: (repost) Reminder for review of Design Guidelines document
>

---

From: Alan DeKok <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 22:42:04 +0200

> The changes made in -12 largely relate to the organizational issues

  And others.

> Therefore it would appear that Issue 327 remains open, and possibly some
> of the concerns expressed by Avi and others relating to Issue 325.

  Issue #325 has been addressed in -12.  Issue #327 is being worked on.
 All other concerns are either addressed in -12, or are out of scope of
the document.

> publication of the document.

  Given the volume of criticism directed against the document, and the
strong desire that it be re-organized, I would hope that people care
enough to review the -12 version, which directly addresses their
concerns.  If their concerns aren't strong enough to warrant a review of
-12, then I suggest that the concerns aren't serious.

  I will review the text suggested in issue #327 for inclusion in the
next rev of the document.  But the document has changed substantially
since the review was made, and portions of the suggestions are no longer
relevant.

  If there are no other concerns with -12, then I suggest that we do a
-13 addressing issue #327, and call the document "finished".

  Alan DeKok.