Keith Moore wrote:
On Oct 29, 2010, at 4:54 AM, t.petch wrote:
By contrast, the delays in producing an RFC seem to revolve around
WG process,
I'm convinced the problem is primarily in the WG processing of the
document, _not_ in the IESG review and neither in the 3 maturity levels.
The current maturity levels "Proposed", "Draft" and "Standard" are MORE
about document quality than protocol usefulness and popularity -- and
they IMHO accurately reflect (lack of) document quality in most cases.
What I get from this is that the entire community needs to be involved
in review and input of future RFCs much earlier in the process than
Last Call. In my experience, the problem is generally not that the
people "coming out of the woodwork" are making irrelevant suggestions,
because IESG is fairly good at ignoring these. The problem seems to be
that by the time a document as reached Last Call, the working group is
past the point where it can meaningfully consider input from outside
for anything but the most trivial changes - and the problems identified
in Last Call are often much more fundamental than that.
Maybe it would help if the early I-Ds would be more explicit in reflecting
the document status and state of the discussion, for each and
every section and subsection -- so that reviewers get a better picture
about what level of feedback the WG is looking for.
It might also help if the early document would try to get the solution
architecture document accurately before fleshing out the details of
the implementation. A lot of proposals start out with the implementation
details of the solution and little about the solution architecture.
IMHO, Design flaws that require non-trivial changes are *MUCH* easier
to notice and to discuss at the abstract solution architecture level.
The reason why the TLS renegotiation flaw went unnoticed for so many
years was that noone spent two hours on describing the architecture
of the TLS renegotiation.
-Martin
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf