On 6/13/15 12:22 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 14/06/2015 01:19, John C Klensin wrote: >> ... However, if a WG is >> started with a "solution" and a group of people behind it, there >> are some bad effects: > Yes, and this is certainly a very real situation. I've personally > experienced it in the past, and am currently experiencing it > (without belligerence, fortunately). I'm actually pretty ambivalent about this one. I'd much rather see things coming in that are relatively well-baked than see proposals that are just problem descriptions. It seems to me to be a more productive use of energy to negotiate engineering differences than it is go try to figure out whether or not a given problem statement reflects an actual problem that somebody is really experiencing, or if there's the ability to come up with a useful solution. Yes, it can be heated and horrible (and I actually left the IETF for several years in part because of my experience along these lines in one particular working group), but I think we're better off figuring out how to deal with these situations than we are going with the problem statement/ use case/gap analysis model, which is really beginning to annoy me as unproductive, slow, and unmoored to much that's useful. Melinda