Hi - > From: "Ted Hardie" <ted.ietf@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "IETF" <ietf@xxxxxxxx> > Sent: Friday, October 29, 2010 4:15 PM > Subject: No single problem... (was Re: what is the problem bis) ... > As is moderately obvious from the stream of commentary on this > thread and there companions, there is no *one* problem at > the root of all this. One way to draw this is: ... I wonder whether our collective non-enforcement of the last paragraph of RFC 2026 section 6.2 has also contributed to this mess. When a standards-track specification has not reached the Internet Standard level but has remained at the same maturity level for twenty-four (24) months, and every twelve (12) months thereafter until the status is changed, the IESG shall review the viability of the standardization effort responsible for that specification and the usefulness of the technology. Following each such review, the IESG shall approve termination or continuation of the development effort, at the same time the IESG shall decide to maintain the specification at the same maturity level or to move it to Historic status. This decision shall be communicated to the IETF by electronic mail to the IETF Announce mailing list to allow the Internet community an opportunity to comment. This provision is not intended to threaten a legitimate and active Working Group effort, but rather to provide an administrative mechanism for terminating a moribund effort. Our current way of doing business has only a few wilted carrots and no sticks to goad advancement efforts. Randy _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf