---- Original Message -----
From: "Melinda Shore" <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <dcrocker@xxxxxxxx>; <ietf@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 8:06 AM
> On 5/29/13 10:53 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > I see a wedge :-)
> > The problem is where to stop.
>
> Well, I don't know. Maybe the problem is where to
> start. That is to say, I don't know what problem
> this document is trying to solve, or if there even
> is a problem.
So don't start!
I-D adoption is in the gift of the WG Chairs and some do an excellent
job, others make a hash of it (which in turn increases the workload on
other parts of the IETF).
Question is, can we do anything to reduce the hashes without at the same
time impairing excellence (short of improving the quality of WG Chairs,
which I suspect is not realistic)?
I note that this discussion last surfaced on this list six months ago,
almost to the day; my sense then was that that most thought that this
should not become a process but perhaps, like European referenda, the
question will go on being put until the acceptable answer emerges:-)
Tom Petch
I know that we've had some major
> document quality issues in opsawg and Benoit has
> provided some needed guidance on document adoption,
> but this doesn't seem to be dealing with that sort
> of issue. Is it that people are confused about when
> to adopt a document (or not)? Is this intended to
> provide some sort of context to resolve complaints?
> Is this a tutorial?
>
> To be honest at this point I'm sort of reflexively
> anti-process-documents, unless there's an actual problem
> that needs actual solution.
>
> Melinda
>
>