Hi, On 2021-4-27, at 15:40, Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The very notion of "adoption" of a draft by the IETF (or at least by a working group) is a Bad Idea, as it tends to indicate an assumed direction for the WG that isn't yet reflected by a deep understanding of the draft or its implications, and makes it harder for a WG to change direction. I'm not sure I follow. WGs have adopted I-Ds for decades; it's the usual way in which the IETF works, and is what causes I-D names to change from draft-yourname to draft-ietf. This process is central to our way of working; we even commissioned specific datatracker functionality for it ten years ago (RFC6174) and discussed the common practice in RFC7221. Thanks, Lars
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
