On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Eliot Lear wrote:
By RFC, not by STD (obviously):
Status 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
-------------------------------------------------------------
PS 102 119 71 105 103 131 169
DRAFT 6 6 2 4 7 7 3
...
I believe there are two reasons for the huge gap between PS
and DRAFT:
- it's difficult to get there (interop requirements, picking out
uncommonly used features, etc)
A part of that might also be caused by normative references problems.
I don't think we have much data on that as we haven't run an
experiment (yet).
- nobody wants or needs to do the work (what GM in her right
mind would want her experts working on something that neither
generates new features nor fixes product bugs)
Some of this would in fact usually be documenting the product bugs
that were caused by ambiguous or incorrect specification. You're
right that once you've figured out a way to fix a spec problem in YOUR
implementation, there may be marginal interest in fixing it in the
spec. However, I believe doing so will reduce the load on customer
support (and ultimately also engineering which will need to answer the
escalated support issues), because many of the support issues are
actually caused by interoperability between different products or
vendors.
--
Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf