The MPLS Working Group Review Team is an ad-hoc list of people that the WG chairs may call on to assist with reviews of MPLS drafts.
Reviews may be requested at any stage in the process when the chairs believe that extra input could be helpful. But, in particular, the chairs may ask for reviews in the run-up to WG adoption, during the adoption poll, or during WG last call.
he chairs will normally request that a review be completed by a specific date. If this is not possible, please respond as soon as possible so that an alternate reviewer can be found.
Reviews should comment on whether the document is coherent, is it useful (i.e., is it likely to be actually useful in operational networks), and is the document technically sound?
Please send reviews to the document authors, WG co-chairs and WG secretary, and CC to the MPLS WG email list. If necessary, comments may be sent privately to only the WG chairs.
If you have technical comments you should try to be explicit about what really needs to be resolved before the document can be adopted by the working group, and what can wait until after the document is a working group document.
When authors of a draft approach the chairs asking that the draft be adopted by the MPLS working group, the chairs may ask for a review. We are parituclarly interested in knowing whether the document is in scope for the working group and is ready to be considered for WG adoption. The document does not need to be perfect at this point, but should be a good start.
The reviewer should consider that they are giving advice to the chairs about whether to start an adoption poll on the current revision, and to the authors about how to improve the draft.
During adoption polls, it is important that the mailing list see considered opinions about the drafts being polled (not just a few "+1" emails). The reviewer will be asked to contribute a review during the period of the poll. We are interested in knowing whether the document is ready to be considered for WG adoption. The document does not need to be perfect at this point, but should be a good start.
The reviewer should consider that they are expressing an opinion as part of the adoption poll, and giving advice to the authors about how to improve the draft.
It is often the case that working group last calls get only a few responses, but the chairs need to know that the WG has looked at the text carefully and think it is ready to advance. The reviewer will be asked to contribute a review during the last call period. We need to know that the document is complete, easy to read, and does not contain any functional holes. The document should be ready to become and RFC.
The reviewer should consider that they are expressing an opinion as part of the last call, and giving advice to the authors and WG about how to improve the draft.