On 1/5/07, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jan 5, 2007, at 10:03 AM, Michael Thomas wrote: > My gripe is when an outside AD takes an > interest in the work, goes to the f2f meetings, maybe reads the drafts > but then waits to IESG evaluation time to DISCUSS their issues. If > they know they have a problem(s), it would be *far* better to air that > sooner rather than later for all parties concerned. I agree with the earlier is better than later for comments from anyone, AD or not. A few interesting side cases on this. Some ADs (more than one actually) recently suggested to a WG that something there were doing was likely to result in in a DISCUSS when it reached the IESG. One of the WG members appealed the IESG trying to manipulate WG consensus.
That's completely inaccurate. It was appealed because the IESG engaged in the behavior I'll quote yet again:
Dave Crocker wrote: > There is often a failure to distinguish between new and peculiar problems > created by a particular specification, versus general problems that already exist. > > A classic example of this is citing basic DNS problems, for specifications that > are merely consumers of the DNS and, hence, are not creating any new problems.
Another classic example is citing a basic HTTP security trade-off, and requiring implementations to make specific choices about centralization, internationalization, graphic design, scalability, and security in order to remain conformant. But I digress.
Sort of left me scratching my head on why the WG would not want to know that early but evidently some folks don't.
Knowing early is good. Sometimes, the IESG happens to insist on inaccurate and irrelevant requirements, and argument from authority sometimes results in appeals. There's nothing wrong with that. But let's face it--no one in the WG was worried about a "dicussion". They were worried that the document would be blocked for ideological reasons. -- Robert Sayre "I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time." _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf