On 11/20/2013 9:28 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Nov 20, 2013, at 12:25 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What is the compelling community requirement that demands this
significant bit of extra work be imposed as a barrier to change in
status?
A third alternative would be to do the change, which has been
declared to have consensus, and then also do an informational
document that explains the change. Aside from time spent, I don't
see a downside to this approach (no AD hat, since it's not my
consensus to call).
The problem is that it is make-work. There is no compelling requirement
or benefit that can be pointed to and that has community agreement.
That makes it an inherent downside.
Saying "aside from the time spent" essentially marginalizes the
significant effort of producing and publishing a write-up -- involving a
range of volunteers and IETF staff -- as if it were a free resource,
which of course it isn't.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net