Sorry for the delay, which was due to some staffing changes
at GGF.  I have gone through the final review of this document,
and have now approved it for publication.  It will be GFD-46.

There are two sets of irregularities in this document, which I
am allowing to pass because of the unreasonable delay experienced
by the authors to get this completed.  One irregularity is that
there is no security considerations section.  Another is that
many of the references are not to documents, and therefore
should be in-line references, not for the reference section.

Because the author made it clear to me that no further modifications
to this document are forthcoming, I have made the decision that
we will accept the completed document as-is.

Based on my communication (below) with the RG chairs, 
I will go forward with publishing this document.  It's now in
final editor review, prior to publication.

Subject: Re: Data transport RG doc publication inquiry ([ggf-editor-Submit  
 GGF Draft-618] Operations for Access, Management, and Transport at Remote
 Sites)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:57:43 +0100

Dear Gregory,

Thanks for your message.

This document has been through many review cycles within the group,
especially between Reagan and me, and was submitted by the RG Chairs to the
Area Co-Chairs during the summer 2003.

Peter Clarke had a few reservations about this document and requested, as
Area Co-Chair, an extra review cycle at the area level. This review cycle
took about 6 months to complete, and resulted in the version officially
submitted on 7 January 2004 for publication by the GGF. This document is
thus endorsed by the RG Chairs and the Area Co-Chairs.

As far as I can tell, this document is ready for publication by the GGF.

Best regards
Jean-Philippe


On 09.03.05 07:38, Gregory Newby wrote:
>Dear Pascale, J.P. & Roger:
>
>I'm writing to ask for help in moving forward with a document in the
>GGF Editor pipeline.  It's authored by Reagan Moore, dated January 7
>2004, "Operations for Access, Management, and Transport at Remote
>Sites."
>
>This document was submitted over a year ago to the editor pipeline
>for publication by the GGF.  Unfortunately, it never moved through
>the steps towards publication until a little over a month ago.
>the steps towards publication until a little over a month ago.
>I took over the GGF editor role in October, and it took that
>long to find out that it was, in fact, quite ready to move forward.  
>
>The full tracker is below, see this URL for the document:
>       https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?aid=618
>
>My question is: From the RG chairs' point of view (yours), is this
>document ready to be accepted for publication by the GGF?
>
>Normally, chairs (or the author) would shepherd the document
>through the process, in cooperation with the GGF editor.  In this
>case, when I emailed Reagan he said he thought it had been
>published long ago - and nobody at all made any public comments.
>
>So, I'm looking for two assurances, if you can offer them:
>
>1) That this document has been through last call and other
>formalities in the RG, and was submitted with the endorsement
>of the RG chairs (you); and
>
>2) That your opinion is that it's ready for publication by
>the GGF.
>
>If not, the document can still be published by the GGF, but
>it will involve additional involvement from Reagan, and further
>review.  The GGF's GFD #1 has a little language on this procedure.
>
>I'm *very* sorry that this document has languished for over
>a year.  I also wish I had emailed you previously to tell you
>about the situation, but instead I simply pushed the document
>into a (rather fruitless) public comment period.  While the good
>news is that I expect an improved diligence the document pipeline
>henceforward, it's truly distressing that this document seems to
>have been given so little proper attention.  My apologies.
>
>Thanks for any help or guidance you can provide.
>  -- Greg
>

I have emailed the RG chairs ( Pascale, J.P. & Roger) asking for 
guidance in how to proceed.

This document will now enter a 30 day public comment period.

Due Date: 3-8-05

David will ping the authors, per the Jan 25 conference call.  We need to hear whether this document is ready to move forward, though it's not certain 
what we are waiting for from the authors.