On 8. Apr 2024, at 15:56, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think Bron covered the more substantive part of this but it seems > to me that, if our model is that AD review after publication is > requested followed by IETF Last Call are actually the first points at > which we expect the IESG and the broader community to carefully > review the document, this is no such thing as a too-heavy late change > if those reviews spot a non-trivial deficiency or other problem. I wasn’t talking about this particular document (which indeed needs to be under IETF change control), but about the stack of documents derived from other documents which were derived from a third document describing a thriving ecosystem. Significant fundamental new work cannot be started locally in one of the multi-level-derived documents, but must be scoped so it is beneficial for the entire ecosystem. Grüße, Carsten -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
