"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Arguments on complexity are too easy to make. Every time a proposal > is made I hear the complexity argument used against it. Everything > we do is complex. Computers are complex. Committee process usually > increases complexity somewhat. > > If an argument can always be used what is the discrimination power? How about using answers to the question "Is this complexity needed?" as a discriminator? Sometimes, there is no better solution than one with certain complexity. That isn't inherently bad. I'm not sure the need for this particular complex solution was demonstrated. I don't recall anyone defending it. The experimental track thus seems appropriate, if it should be published at all. /Simon _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf