> The current gates for proposed standard are > high. If a doc passes them and no > one finds new issues in two years of use, it is probably done. If > there are issues (filed errata, an ongoing > effort at a -bis, community reaction that it is not really in use), I > think two years will probably find them > well enough for a draft designation (and five for full). Sounds reasonable to me. I suspect that there should be at least the guidance that the protocol is in use. This is a condition that a PS might not be able to meet, but one that Draft and Full should require. Objections based at PS time are usually based on whether or not there are (interoperable) implementations, not whether there is interest in the protocol. Presumably, said implementations don't disappear in two years, though interest may fade. Objections on the grounds of low interest should be easy to dispense with though. _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf