> > > Process-wise, this isn't right, ... > > > > You're correct about the process. I was trying to explain what may > happen in reality... Brian, The problem is that the IESG, in reality, treats these deadlines as optional. Hence, mechanisms that are designed to balance trade-offs between timeliness and oversight have become skewed wholly towards the oversight, losing the timeliness. Please imagine someone running a network that is chronically congested and simply shrugging at the problem. That is what the IETF experiences today with the process at document completion. Users of a chronically congested network will switch to an alternate provider. Not surprisingly, that is what we are seeing happen to the network we call the IETF. It does not seem at all reasonable to stay with a process that is chronically congested. We simply must find alternative mechanisms. d/ --- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking +1.408.246.8253 dcrocker a t ... WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf