On 24-jun-2006, at 15:05, Keith Moore wrote:
I don't think the solution is more hoops to jump through. Unless I'm
mistaken, the IESG already has significant lattitude in rejecting
protocols or imposing additional requirements.
By the time IESG gets around to reviewing things, more often than not
it's too late to fix whatever is wrong. What we need to arrange
is that the significant review happens earlier, when the WG is
still functional. By the time the final review rolls around it
should mostly be a formality - assuming, of course, that the WG has
not changed things significantly since earlier reviews.
This is orthogonal to the earlier discussion about whether there
should be additional requirements for running code and so on. (Or at
least, it should be: if you think it's hard to get people to let go
of specifications they hold dear, try getting them to part with
running code.)
The IETF wgs work well when there is a clear "best" solution or set
of more or less equivalent best solutions. As far as I can tell, the
wg process and the IETF process in general have a hard time working
well when there is no clear best solution so several interests must
be traded off against each other. If a wg succeeds in doing this,
there's always someone to cry faul because their favorite interest
didn't get top billing as soon as the result leaves the wg.
Unfortunately, we don't seem to have a way to resolve this other than
let the market decide, which isn't too good for the IETF because it
means that some work done in the IETF is subsequently deemed a
failure and people who don't understand this take a dim view of the
IETF because they think it can't create good protocols. In reality,
the IETF is successful because it allowed the market to do its work
rather than to impose the choice of a small group. But then, the IETF
operates under an American culteral bias and in American culture
there is no appreciation for second place, only for winning.
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf