RJ Atkinson wrote: > > Rather than quibble about the details of this, I'd > urge folks to support the move to 2-track. > > If it becomes clear later, after experience with 2-track, > that 2-track needs to be further refined later, then > the community can always do that. In the meantime, it > is quite clear the 3-track system is not working. I'd rather redefine the qualification criteria for the 3rd maturity level than getting rid of it. I think it would be ridiculous if the IETF declares a specification a "full standard" if >>90% of the installed base is still one or more protocol revisions behind. Take TLS as an example. While I assume it might be possible to find a few interoperable implementations of TLSv1.2 (rfc-5248, Aug-2008), it would be ridiculous to declare this a full IETF standard, because in reality it is not actually used. >From a recent survey done by Yngve N. Pettersen about rfc-5746 patch status of public TLS servers on the internet: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tls/current/msg06432.html - 99 of 383531 [servers] support TLS 1.1 - 2 of 383531 [servers] support TLS 1.2 (both are known test servers) A specification only deserves the "full standard" label if there is a significant amount of usage (IMHO > 20%) of the installed base actually uses this particular specification/protocol revision. If there is a lag in adoption, then this is likely an indicator of feature creep, i.e. insufficient separation of non-essential functionality into true options. Look at IPv6 as another example: Although there is a significant installed base at least in theory, this part of the implementation is normally disabled because it cannot be used anyway. The full standard label should be reserved for a protocol or technology that has achieved a significant usage in the marketplace and by that proven that it is an adequate technology living up to the market and consumer requirements as-is. The current "adoption lag" for several IETF specs is a clear indicator that there is something wrong with the development process in the IETF. An approach of making the demonstration of independent interop the qualifier for "full standard" is how Management nowadays creates success -- by definition rather than by achievements. -Martin _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf