I think that the meta issues under discussion here will not be helped
by diverting discussion to IETF evaluation of my specific examples.
The work often involves some kind of controversial issues, which would
take us way off target.
At 20:20 +0100 25/06/01, Lloyd Wood wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Einar Stefferud wrote:
> Keith -- I beg to differ. There are a number of other groups that
> have considered taking their work to the IETF, but decided instead to
> just use the IETF WG Processes, as described in the relevant RFCs.
> They have done this with good results, and I recommend often that
> this be done by others.
which other groups have done so successfully, then?
I will only identify these others in private messages, because I do
not want this discussion thread to turn into a feeding frenzy over
the the specific work that was done. Lets stick to the general meta
And, of course, some of them have not turned into adoptable results,
which must be expected and not therefore used to fault the concept of
using IETF tools outside the IETF, and perhaps bringing work to the
IETF after beginning elsewhere. Failing to produce something useful
in the IETF sense without bothering the IETF is not harmful to the
IETF, and not a proper issue in this discussion.
> But otherwise, there are no particular inhibitors. IETF even allows
> outsiders to post IETF-DRAFTS, which serve to inform the larger IETF
> community about such non-IETF work. All this add to the over all
> value of the work being done.
IETF allows _anyone_ to post an internet draft.
Certainly, and I loudly applaud this fact.
The only inconvenience I find with it is that the DRAFT publication
process stops dead in advance of IETF meetings, which is unfortunate
for anyone outside IETF who has a need to publish a draft during such
times of "power outage".
It would really be nice if DRATS that are declared to not be related
to the meeting could still be published without such interruptions.
This is both a suggestion and a request, but not a demand. I do not
know all the aspects of this practice. but, it is a part of the
"skin" that encloses the IETF and protects it from outside influences.
everyone's an outsider.
But some are more outsider than others;-)... Maybe lots more;-)...