Documents marked for telechat not on the web agenda

[ietf-svn-bot]

owner:olau@iola.dk resolution_fixed type_defect | by henrik@levkowetz.com

---

On 2010-08-09 18:31 Amy Vezza said:

Hi Alexa (and Glen and Henrik),

I noticed this morning that there are a group of documents (seven
altogether) that are on the telechat agenda that do not show up on
the Web agenda, and were not included in the agenda and package sent
out on Thursday, even though they were added to the agenda via the I-
D Tracker before that time (David's document he lists below is one of
the seven). If you look at the I-D Tracker at the list of "Documents
on upcoming agenda(s)" page, there are seven documents at the top of
the list, a line divider and twenty-one documents also listed for the
August 12, 2010 agenda. Only the twenty-one documents listed below
the divider line show up on the Web agenda.

I sent email to Cindy to see if she was seeing what I saw because we
hadn't received any email from the IESG on this issue yet. She was
seeing the same thing, and we were just about to contact Glen and
Henrik about this new I-D Tracker bug.

---

Issue migrated from trac:370 at 2022-03-04 01:01:37 +0000

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com commented

---

On 2010-08-10 01:28 Cindy Morgan said:

A little bit more information on this bug:

So far, there are 7 docs affected. The docs were added by Russ
Housley, Lars Eggert, and David Harrington. David, at least, added
his docs to the agenda using the new IESG tracker. I don't know about
Lars and Russ.

The 7 docs affected are:

draft-ietf-behave-dns64
draft-ietf-proto-wgdocument-states
draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-lcd
draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-for-sctp
draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-tunnel
draft-juskevicius-datatracker-wgdocstate-reqts
draft-sheffer-emu-eap-eke

None of these show up at all on https://datatracker.ietf.org/iesg/agenda/documents/

In the old IESG tracker, if you click on the "Documents on upcoming
agenda(s)" button, these seven show up in their own section, all
listed for the 2010-08-12 agenda, but separated from the other docs
that are actually showing up on the agenda for 2010-08-12 (as Amy
described in her original note).

However, looking closer at the history of these drafts in the old
tracker, it turns out that 3 of the 7 are actually intended to be on
the 2010-08-26 agenda, despite what it says on the "Documents on
upcoming agenda(s)" page. Those three documents are:

draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-lcd
draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-for-sctp
draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-tunnel

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com commented

---

On 2010-08-10 14:30 Henrik Levkowetz said:

All these have in common that there's no telechat date set. The old
tracker apparently shows the documents as being on the first upcoming
telechat even if there's no date set. The date can be inspected and
set on the new trackers 'edit state' page for the document:

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-behave-dns64/edit/state/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-proto-wgdocument-states/edit/state/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-lcd/edit/state/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-dtls-for-sctp/edit/state/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-tunnel/edit/state/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-juskevicius-datatracker-wgdocstate-reqts/edit/state/
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sheffer-emu-eap-eke/edit/state/

Now, not being a user of the IESG tracker, I don't know this: How does
an AD normally go about putting a document on the agenda?

It seems clear that the way it's now being done results in an agenda
flag being set for the document, without the date being set. Either
we need to fix things so that the date is set, too; or we need to fix
things so that if no date is set, the document is listed on the first
upcoming agenda. I need to know more about the workflow, how things
are done, to try to fix this (or have this fixed) the right way...

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com commented

---

On 2010-08-10 16:25 Amy Vezza said:

The way the original tracker works is IF a document has NEVER been on
a telechat agenda before, and it is flagged for the agenda, it
automatically is added to the NEXT telechat (in the original tracker
it is a checkbox that says "Agenda?" and beside the check box is the
drop down list the AD can use to set the document to a specific
agenda). The AD can (of course) choose to change the telechat date
to any of the next four telechat dates in the system before flagging
by use of the drop down list. The AD must then save the change by
hitting the "Update" button in the middle of the page - above the
comment log.

IF a document has already been on a telechat agenda, and is returning
the AD MUST choose the date of the telechat he wants the document on

• again, any of the four dates currently set in the system are
  available. Originally, it was thought that about two months into
  the future would be enough for the ADs to choose for documents. It
  gives enough time for an independent submission to go into and end
  Last Call (which takes four weeks) while still being set for a future
  agenda.

The Secretariat sets the dates in the telechat by "rolling up" or
"updating" the list of possible dates after each telechat, so the
list is changeable, as the dates can be moved up or back to adjust
around an IETF meeting - or on rare occasions when the IESG chooses
to change the schedule for whatever reason.

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com commented

---

On 2010-08-10 21:24 Russ Housley said:

The UI shows a date when checking the add-to-agenda box. It is a bug in
the new tracker if this date is not being stored in the database.

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com changed owner from olau@iola.com to olau@iola.dk

[ietf-svn-bot]

@olau@iola.dk commented

---

I've fixed the save bug in revision 2498, stupid mistake. Do we still need to handle agenda=1 but telechat_date not being set, or was that just rogue entries from the other bug?

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com changed status from new to closed

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com set resolution to fixed

[ietf-svn-bot]

@henrik@levkowetz.com commented

---

Fixed in 98f7740:

Merged ea999ce and bbd9d3f from olau@. Fixes issue #370.