Add I-D.draft-jfinkhaeuser-caps-for-distributed-auth

[jfinkhaeuser]

Internet draft, some peer review/co-authorship already occurred, but more would be useful. That's an invitation to send comments, by the way - the draft will undergo a couple of revisions before an working or research group might adopt it.

[dckc]

"peer review" in that section is meant in the sense of academic peer review, where an established editorial review board has selected some work out of many submissions.

Internet drafts are the input of a peer review process, not the output, right?

[jfinkhaeuser]

There is no such thing as an editorial review board in IETF or IRTF, not in the sense you mean. But while I-Ds are on the input side of things, that doesn't mean they're not reviewed by peers. Plenty of them get reviewed, this one has gotten some. I-Ds can also stay in that form forever and remain published. Or they can become RFCs. That doesn't depend on review as much as consensus, though, which is not the same thing. I would guess you're missing a section that fits better. This just seemed like the closest.

…

On 9 December 2022 21:53:18 UTC, Dan Connolly ***@***.***> wrote: "peer review" in that section is meant in the sense of academic peer review, where an established editorial review board has selected some work out of many submissions. Internet drafts are the _input_ of a peer review process, not the output, right? -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #34 (comment) You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: ***@***.***>

[dckc]

There is no such thing as an editorial review board in IETF or IRTF, not in the sense you mean.

IESG review is somewhat analogous.

I would guess you're missing a section that fits better.

There's a general "articles" section. But given the 6 month expiry of internet drafts, I'm not sure it belongs there either.

[jfinkhaeuser]

It'll get updated; I have some more reviews pending and a few edits. Just don't link to -00, but to the overview page like I did?

The other thing to consider is, expired drafts still (tend to) stay archived. It's not that they're gone after that.

[jfinkhaeuser]

I mean, look: if you don't want to add it, that's fine by me.

But it's capability related, and could use a few more views from the ocap community, so I'd really like to get feedback. Adding the draft here was a way for getting the word out on that.