this ID was one of a number of thoughts I offered up shortly after I left the IESG after a decade as general proposals to try to get people to think about our standards process - but, not unlike the newtrk[1] effort of a few years later, there was not enough support on the then current management (IAB & IESG) for much progress but I do not think it profitable to rehash the details of the time at this point Scott [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/newtrk/about/ > On Jul 3, 2019, at 6:44 PM, Heather Flanagan <rse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On Jul 3, 2019, at 3:32 PM, Warren Kumari <warren@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 1:38 PM Scott O. Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> see “stable snapshot” in https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bradner-ietf-stds-trk-01 >> >> Ah, nice, thanks.. There are some definite parallels with this. What we were proposing is similar, but less “strong” - it doesn’t have anything like IETF / IESG consensus, rather just “this is what the *WG* currently thinks”. > > Ohhh, this is useful, thank you! I tried to do an archive search to find out why that draft stopped at -01. Would you be willing to share why the idea was rejected and/or did not get traction? > > -Heather > (Now from the correct email address)
