The IESG also seeks comments from interested document editors and
working group chairs pointing to instances where the second part of
the experiment would be useful.
In the past, it was rather common for there to be a not insignificant
number of documents in the RFC editor queue, whose publication was
blocked waiting on some other document not yet in the RFC editor
queue. The actual dependency chain wasn't always apparent either (you
could have a transitive relationship going through 3-4 documents
before finding the actual document that was the source of the
blockage). Some of these documents could take more than a year before
they became approved by the IESG for publication.
My guess is that many of the documents awaiting publication would be
viewed as candidates for allowing a downreference to an ID
(especially, when publication is/has been delayed for 6+ months). The
longer publication has been blocked, the greater the pressure to
invoke this aspect of the experiment.
Personally, I don't think RFCs should allow normative references to
IDs, but that is a different question than how often there will be a
tempatation to invoke it.
Looking at the current RFC editor queue, I count 25 IETF documents in
MISSREF*R state. A good number of been waiting for roughly a year, one
document for nearly 3.
Ietf mailing list