> 6 jul 2015 kl. 16:12 skrev Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > On 7/4/2015 2:49 PM, Randy Bush wrote: >>> there are a number of people in the community who have very specific >>> expertise in some relevant areas but who don't follow rfc-interest or >>> who have stopped doing so. >> >> that is their choice. but when one votes with one's feet, one kinda >> relinquishes the right to ex post facto second-guess those who stay >> home. > > > I think there is a more interesting issue, here, than might seem obvious. > > Certainly 'if you didn't show up, you don't get to complain' is a core > IETF principle. But it is predicated on a significant expectation of > isolated effect. A mailing list defines the topic scope and work within > that topic is typically limited to that scope. Yes, a change to TCP > affects everything sitting on top of it, but absent a disrupting change > to its functional interface, the stuff above can reasonably continue, > oblivious to the change. > > However some actions have broad /direct/ effect, far beyond the > community formed by the normal list discussion group. These notably > involve IETF infrastructure: formal processes, tools, and mechanisms. > Including RFC publication. > > For changes in this IETF fabric, we need to go beyond the core mailing > list and promote information about the anticipated change, to get a > broader range of feedback. The change will affect the broader IETF > population and the 2-week IETF Last Call comment window is too little, > too late, in terms of substantive feedback. > > d/ > -- > Dave Crocker > Brandenburg InternetWorking > bbiw.net > Does the format of DOIs affect the IETF as a whole? Really?