> The IESG also seeks comments from interested document editors and > working group chairs pointing to instances where the second part of > the experiment would be useful. In the past, it was rather common for there to be a not insignificant number of documents in the RFC editor queue, whose publication was blocked waiting on some other document not yet in the RFC editor queue. The actual dependency chain wasn't always apparent either (you could have a transitive relationship going through 3-4 documents before finding the actual document that was the source of the blockage). Some of these documents could take more than a year before they became approved by the IESG for publication. My guess is that many of the documents awaiting publication would be viewed as candidates for allowing a downreference to an ID (especially, when publication is/has been delayed for 6+ months). The longer publication has been blocked, the greater the pressure to invoke this aspect of the experiment. Personally, I don't think RFCs should allow normative references to IDs, but that is a different question than how often there will be a tempatation to invoke it. Looking at the current RFC editor queue, I count 25 IETF documents in MISSREF*R state. A good number of been waiting for roughly a year, one document for nearly 3. Thomas _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf