Dave, One of your comments seems to apply to the effectiveness of having an early submission deadline. What is the point of monkeying around with early submission deadlines when they are not very effective anyway? There seems to be two elements to your argument: that the rule does not seem to apply in every case and that exceptions seem to favor inappropriate submissions while enforcement tends to impede submission of "legitimate late postings". I have to admit that I agree with the sentiment that they are not very effective - at least not always. Sometimes a WG chair schedules time to talk about an ID that doesn't exist at the time of the schedule announcement and - sometimes - still has not been submitted by the time of the meeting. Being used to somewhat firmer guidelines, that sort of thing catches me by surprise, unless - like some people - I have grown inured to this sort of exception within a specific WG. So, one question is whether or not it is appropriate to allow this practice to continue. That question needs to be answered - one way or the other - before we can really address your concern about playing around with submission deadlines. However, the bit about exceptions favoring innappropriate late submissions and enforcement impeding legitimate submissions depends on how we define "appropriate" and "legitimate". IMHO, I think the common - usage-based - definition is that WG chairs get to arbitrate the meaning of these terms as it applies to ID submissions for their own WG, especially when submissions are late. If _we_ don't like the way that a specific WG chair does this, then we can individually complain about it and - if enough complaints are heard - something will most likely be done about it. If _we_ don't like the practice in general, then we can complain about it in this venue. But - as long as the usage definition is that it is up to the WG chair to define what is an "appropriate" or "legitimate" ID submissions - then (by that definition) whatever the chair allows to be discussed is both appropriate and legitimate. If we - as individuals - disagree, then it is up to us to say so during the highly traditional "agenda bashing" period at each WG meeting. On the other hand, if someone wants to reduce the WG chair's role in arbitrating the legitimacy of an ID submission, then it is up to them to make sure that their submission is in compliance with formal submission deadlines, format, etc. - so that no "exception" is required. How wide-spread the practice of ignoring the deadlines is in practice and how much the IETF as a whole may have come to accept that this is something that is occasionally done (by any definition of occasionally we care to use), is only relevant if you would argue that there should be no deadlines. This, then, is an implication of your argument and - for the reasons Harald, and others, stated - this is unacceptable. -- Eric _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf