On 3/3/2021 11:11 AM, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
I checked the -09 and it covers the discuss bits just fine. I wasn't in a hurry to clear my discuss, though, since the nature of the ongoing discussions last week would arguably make for a discuss in its own right.
Since you mention it, I will question it. A Discuss is an exercise in authority to prevent progress until a significant problem is fixed.
The various changes are almost certainly making the specification better, but were they essential to achieve an adequate 'experiment'? The document went through 3 months of discussion on an established list, one month of IETF last call, and an IESG review, with no one noting or demanding any of these changes.
It is not as if that sort of extended process guarantees adequacy, but it's nothing, either.
Again, it's not that the document is not better, but 'better' is an infinite task.
For which of these changes would its absence have ensured failure? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
