On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 12:26:23 +0200 Iljitsch van Beijnum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 24-jun-2006, at 4:26, Keith Moore wrote: > > > IETF is already plunging toward irrelevance at terminal velocity. The > > only way to arrest the descent is for it to start producing better > > quality and more relevant specifications. A good start would be for > > it to actually pay some attention to the problem definition and rough > > specification phases and to conduct them in an environment where they > > can get meaningful review outside of a narrow community. > > I don't think the solution is more hoops to jump through. Unless I'm > mistaken, the IESG already has significant lattitude in rejecting > protocols or imposing additional requirements. By the time IESG gets around to reviewing things, more often than not it's too late to fix whatever is wrong. What we need to arrange is that the significant review happens earlier, when the WG is still functional. By the time the final review rolls around it should mostly be a formality - assuming, of course, that the WG has not changed things significantly since earlier reviews. Keith _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
