The majority of documents are close to being acceptable - maybe 10% are
not close.
there is a small question about the criteria that you might be using.
the current ietf's track is quite poor, both with respect to timeliness and
quality. quite simply we are taking a long time to turn out lots of
specifications that tend not to get used very much.
so it is unclear that the considerable costs of the current 'quality'
mechanisms are working very well.
you might say that that means we need to get the 10% to a smaller number, but
my point is that the 90% is being approved without much benefit to the
community (or, apparently, much harm) so it's not clear that all that effort
to enforce quality criteria imposed by individual area directors is all that
useful...
except for frustrating the heck out of all those hard-working working group
participants who took so long to create the now-delayed specification...
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf