In message <4280EF10.1080102@xxxxxxxxx>, "Eric A. Hall" writes: > >On 5/10/2005 12:45 PM, Thomas Narten wrote: > >> One example (and I'm just using it because it was it comes to mind, >> and one that I think is symptomatic of the broader problem): > >> October 15, 2004: IESG approves 4-document set. >> Within one week: authors send xml source to RFC editor >> March 10, 2005: IESG requests expedited processing (target date: March 31) >> March 29, 2005: RFCs published >> >> Total time between IESG approval and publication, 5 1/2 months. > >That was expedited. Better example is iSCSI. Draft-20 was approved Feb >2003 [http://www.ietf.org/IESG/Announcements/draft-ietf-ips-iscsi.ann] but >published as RFC3720 in April 2004, for a lag time of 14 months. > >I have no knowledge of this process and maybe there were a lot of changes >needed or something, but for a whole year there were vendors releasing >products marketed as conformant with "draft 20" > A delay of that length is generally due to dependencies -- normative references to other documents that are held up. When a document is in the RFC Editor queue, you can query its state via their web site. --Prof. Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf