We really should get serious about the term 'proposed', and note that the
referenced document is under development. It is not an end state in itself,
just aging on the shelf to meet a process check mark.
Tony
Tony,
That would not work, would it? The driving force behind most WG efforts
is the community of vendors, who want to produce products ASAP. They
certainly don't want to wait for a document to "develop". For their
purposes, Proposed Standard and product out the door (if not earlier, at
the I-D stage).
Presumably the WG process takes so long because different vendors have
to work hard to reach a consensus. Once it is reached, they don't want a
bit to change in the spec before the end of their product cycle.
In this environment, the only thing that seems to make sense is for WGs
to start usually at Experimental (someone else suggested this, I
apologize for not recalling who it was).
Bob Braden
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf