IPS-ALL: Last Call process

["Elizabeth G. Rodriguez" <Elizabeth.G.Rodriguez@123mail.net>]

The following is the contents of the presentation made Thursday evening,
on the last call process.

Working group Last Call will be issued
. Editorial comments directly to authors/editor (e.g. typos, grammar,
etc.), with copy to chairs/technical coordinator.
. Technical comments to WG mailing list
. All should review the document carefully, to insure that it is
technically correct, the document has been prepared according to IETF
guidelines and that it is ready to be forwarded to the IESG.

Please Consult
. "Considerations for Internet Drafts" - covers information on process,
including nits that will insure that the IESG will return the draft.
(http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html )
. "Recent and Proposed RFC Editorial Policy Changes" -- .
(http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html)
*** Note:  The latter is now policy.

4 types of RFCs 
. Informational
. Experimental
. BCP
. Standards Track
The five initial documents to go to last call (Security, FC
Encapsulation, iSCSI, FCIP, iFCP) will all be standards track documents.

Working Group Last Call
. Will be announced on IPS reflector
. Review period of 2-4 weeks will be noted.
. Comments will be resolved on the reflector.
. New document resulting from comment resolution submitted to the WG for
quick review, and then submitted to the ADs. 
*** Request to editors: Please generate companion documentation
indicating changes from Last Called drafted (such as PDF document with
change bars, or simple text to the reflector)if at all possible. 

The remainder of the presentation was taken from 'A Year in the Life of
an Internet Draft' by Ned Freed, Allison Mankin & Thomas Narten, with
minor changes.

Becoming an RFC - The Process 
. AD review (3 business days ;-)
	- Is document ready?
. Is document full of nits? 
	- Is IETF last call needed? 
. Required for BCP, Standards track
. Sometimes used with Info or Experimental RFCs
. 2 weeks for WG documents
. During IETF Last call
	- Community has chance to comment
	- IANA review (IANA considerations)
		*** Note:  IANA ONLY looks at the IANA consideration
section.  Make sure this section is clear and self contained.
	- RFC Editor check (formatting, normative refs, etc.)

IESG Review
. AD verifies that outstanding issues resolved, then sends to IESG for
full review
	- Technical quality?
	- Interoperability?
	- Completeness?
	- Adequate security?
	- ID nits (MUST/MAY/SHOULD defined?...) 
	- Readability?
	- Usefulness?...

Returned Documents
. IESG comments are returned to author(s)/WG chair/WG
. Iteration sometimes necessary...
. Revised ID may be needed
. Revised drafts may go directly to IESG, may need WG last call, or even
another IETF last call (extreme cases)

Are We Done Yet?
. IESG concerns satisfactorily addressed?
. IANA concerns satisfactorily addressed?
. No normative references to Internet Drafts?
. Is final ID in ID directory?
. Finally!!! -  IESG Secretary sends approval announcement

The RFC Editor's Turn
. ID enters RFC editor's queue 
. Some IDs are more equal than others
	- Standards track, WG documents have priority
	- IESG sometimes requests high priority (e.g., for RFC needed by
another standards body)
. Editing process begins
	- Check with IANA - fill in IANA assigned values (Oops -- IANA
has more questions...)
	- 48 hour author review
. Author must OK final version (Hello... where are the authors???)
. Editorial changes only (Oops - these changes seem substantive...)
. An RFC is born!!!
. Total Elapsed time: 2.7 weeks - 13.4 years :-)

Something to Think About
. Internet Draft Statistics (Dec. 12, 2001):
	- Overall:
. 2972 total 
. 2313 (excluding expired -- < 4kB in size)
	- Working Group Ids (excluding expired)
. 975 Ids
. 197 -00 submissions
	- Individual Submissions (excluding expired)
. 1338 IDs 
. 681 -00 submissions

Useful URLs
. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt
. http://www.ietf.org/ID-nits.html 
. http://www.ietf.org/IESG/request.html
. http://www.rfc-editor.org/queue.html
. http://www.rfc-editor.org/howtopub.html