--On Saturday, October 29, 2011 14:47 +0200 Arnt Gulbrandsen
<arnt(_at_)gulbrandsen(_dot_)priv(_dot_)no> wrote:
On 10/29/2011 09:44 AM, Peter J. Holzer wrote:
How high is the cost of of publishing an experimental RFC?
Somebody has to write it, a few people have to discuss it on
a mailing list, and finally an editor has to do a bit of QA
and publish it. What do I miss?
About two thirds.
There's a document shepherd and a draft writeup (with which
the author helps, but it's real work even so), a responsible
AD, last call, IESG discussion including a phone meeting, IANA
vetting/feedback, and the editor does a little more than you
appear to think.
The potential shepherds typically have too much to do, the
responsible AD and other IESG members much too much. Don't
know about IANA these days.
There's also a minor money problem. The RFC editor is paid by
the IETF, and the IETF is anything but rich.
And still probably an underestimate. Perhaps a better question
might have been "how much less does it cost to get an
experimental RFC published as compared to a standards-track
one?" The answer is "little or nothing". The IESG seems to
take every document it has to process seriously and, while I
sometimes question priorities (especially about nit-picking that
could probably be left to the RFF Editor), it is hard to
complain about their being serious and diligent.
john