Re: Comments on draft-carpenter-newtrk-questions-00.txt

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Eliot Lear wrote:
By RFC, not by STD (obviously):

Status	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005
-------------------------------------------------------------
PS	102	119	71	105	103	131	169
DRAFT	6	6	2	4	7	7	3
...
I believe there are two reasons for the huge gap between PS and DRAFT:

- it's difficult to get there (interop requirements, picking out
  uncommonly used features, etc)

A part of that might also be caused by normative references problems. I don't think we have much data on that as we haven't run an experiment (yet).

- nobody wants or needs to do the work (what GM in her right
  mind would want her experts working on something that neither
  generates new features nor fixes product bugs)

Some of this would in fact usually be documenting the product bugs that were caused by ambiguous or incorrect specification. You're right that once you've figured out a way to fix a spec problem in YOUR implementation, there may be marginal interest in fixing it in the spec. However, I believe doing so will reduce the load on customer support (and ultimately also engineering which will need to answer the escalated support issues), because many of the support issues are actually caused by interoperability between different products or vendors.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]