On 11/07/2015 05:53 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
I'd actually prefer that *Proposed Standard* RFCs would drop in "quality", and the number of documents being advanced to IS (with a higher quality) went up.
If Proposed Standards weren't treated by the industry as being suitable for widespread deployment, I might agree with you. But after all of these years, I don't think we're going to change that.
The bar between ID -> PS is already too high in my opinion, and it contributes to the IETF "being too slow". It means ADs are being excessively loaded.
I actually think the criteria in RFC 2026 are very good, and the problem is that in practice we often fail to even meet those criteria. We often approve documents that have serious known technical omissions.
But I certainly agree that ADs are excessively loaded. This is not an easy problem to solve.
Keith