On 02/27/2013 01:49 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > On Feb 27, 2013, at 19:18, ned+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> routing around obstacles > It turns out for most people the easiest route around is submitting in time. > > That is actually what counts here: how does the rule influence the behavior of people. > > Chair hat: WORKSFORME. (And, if I could decide it, WONTFIX.) +1.
As far as I can tell, the deadline actually serves the purpose of getting people to focus on IETF and update their documents sufficiently prior to the meeting, that it's reasonable to expect meeting participants to read the drafts that they intend to discuss. And I say this as someone who, as an author, has often found the deadline to be very inconvenient.
And your evidence for this is .. what exactly? Yes, the deadline makes the drafts show up a bit sooner, but I rather suspect that the overwhelming majority of people don't bother to do much reading in the inverval. I certainly don't. And given the ready available tools to tell the reader what's changed I don't need to. In almost all cases for -nn where nn > 00 I can check what's changed in a few minutes, and I can do it in the context of the actual work being done. I don't really have any objection to a -00 cutoff, but the second cutoff is nothing short of asinine. In any case, I personally have basically stopped caring about the deadline and I encourage others to do the same. If I make the deadline fine, if not I post the update somewhere else, done. Ned