On 04/08/2016 04:46, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> That said, I'm not sure we have a concrete proposal for a thing to do. > > > if you write a draft and have running example code, you are accused to > > be just coming to the ietf for a rubber stamp (cf. sidr). if you have a > > draft and no code, idiots such as i comment that the rubber meets the > > sky. if you have code but no draft, you're a undisciplined hacker, > > unless we're in an even numbered year where we're trying to snuggle up > > to code. > > > imiho, we would benefit from making it easier to come in with a draft > > and code, the first above. > > +5. > > And make it easier to do: > 1) Informational on running code. That is IMHO one of the main attractions of the Independent Submission RFC Stream. (Full disclosure: I'm a member of the Independent Submission Editorial Board.) Brian > 2) Spin to 2.0 for Standards Track. > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > >