Charlie,
Thursday, November 21, 2002, 9:19:29 AM, you wrote:
Charlie> there is nothing preventing such a thing from happening even after
Charlie> working group Last Call, and nothing that assures that one AD's
Charlie> architecture principal is shared by the rest of the IESG or the IAB.
...
Charlie> I think the IESG should try to understand early in the process
...
Charlie> Again, as I stated last night, nothing is black and white, and I do
Charlie> not claim that we need IAB statements on every aspect of protocol
Charlie> design.
I've quoted 3 separate parts of your note. You state a problem,
suggest the need both for documentation of principles and early
analysis of WG efforts, and then end with an acknowledgement that none
of this is simple or straightforward.
You are correct on all 3 points.
We DO need serious quality control efforts and sometimes quite a lot
of them. But we need them to be consistent and we need most of them to
be early, before a working group wastes many person-months of effort.
There is no magic bullet, no single, simple action to make things work
better. But we need to start making some changes immediately. If folks
have not yet read draft-huston-ietf-pact-00, they should read it now.
d/
--
Dave <mailto:dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850