The Idea	A proposal is before the IETF, organizing senior IETF contributors to provide formal technical review of designs and specifications: The procedure calls for a team of 'sirs' to 'card' documents. The basic model is that the IETF will create a team of Senior IETF Reviewers (SIRs, who need be neither male nor knighted) chosen in a way designed to create trust, and that all documents must receive a certain number of reviews by SIRs, prior to being submitted to the IESG or the RFC Editor for publication. Furthermore iterative, incremental reviews at a very early stage are strongly encouraged. The term 'card' is used for textiles and pubs. The former usage removes detritus from textiles and prepares it for weaving. The latter vets participants at the door. The term also is an acronym for 'Careful Additional Review of Documents.' It is entirely reasonable that some SIRs reviewing a given document should be subject matter experts. However the full set of input from SIRs is substantially more useful when it includes SIRs from other areas. In particular, cross-area review makes it more likely that architectural and operational impacts outside of the subject matter will be detected. This is an informal, experimental implementation of the SIRS activity, intended to operate as a proof-of-concept. It is being provided with the explicit knowledge of IETF management, but is very much not yet an official activity of the IETF.
Procedure	Each WG will make its own decision about how its SIRs are selected (e.g. chosen by the WG Chairs, chosen by the document authors concerned, etc.) For individual submissions, the document author(s) will solicit SIR reviews, according to the same principles applied to Working Group documents. There is no fixed number of SIR reviews required prior to submission to the IESG or the RFC Editor. However, it is likely that drafts with at least three positive reviews from SIRs in different areas will experience much shorter IESG review cycles than drafts with fewer positive reviews.
Contact	To enlist the assistance of a SIR, contact them directly at the email address in their entry on the page for: SIRS Experiment — Volunteer Membership  Queries to the entire body of SIRS may be sent to: ietf-sirs@yahoogroups.com
Reviews	Each review must start with a summary statement chosen from or adapted from the following list: This draft is ready for publication as a [type] RFC. This draft is on the right track but has open issues, described in the review. This draft has serious issues, described in the review, and needs to be rethought. This draft has very fundamental issues, described in the review, and further work is not recommended. The length of a review will vary greatly according to circumstances, and it is acceptable for purely editorial comments to be sent privately. All substantive comments must be included in the public review. SIRs should review for all kinds of problems, from basic architectural or security issues, Internet-wide impact, technical nits, problems of form and format (such as IANA Considerations or incorrect references), and editorial issues. As a draft progresses from its initial, "-00" version towards one that is ready for submission, successive SIR reviews should progress from the general architectural level to the editorial level.
Proposal	The complete text of of the SIR proposal is contained in: draft–carpenter–solution–sirs