Hi, Yoav,
Recognizing that we all work in different parts of the IETF, so our
experiences reflect that ...
RFCs have one big advantage over all kinds of "blessed" internet drafts.
The process of publishing an RFC gets the IANA allocations. Every
implementation you make based on a draft will ultimately not work with the
finished RFC because you have to use some "private" ranges of numbers. I
have a feeling (not backed by any evidence) that part of the reason people
rush to publish documents is the need to get IANA assignments for their
implementations.
I know that getting IANA allocations is a major consideration for one of the
SDOs I'm liaison shepherd for, so my experience matches this (of course,
there are various IANA policies - if a registry is first-come first-served,
this isn't a consideration).
If we could have some kind of "viable", "promising" or "1st review" status
for an Internet Draft, where the IANA assignments can be done on a
temporary basis, I think this could allow for better review later on. I
have no idea, though, how to get rid of the "need to support legacy
implementations" argument that will arise later on, if changes to the
protocol are proposed as part of the review.
Again, this depends on the instructions to IANA - some policies are easier
to accommodate than others.
Thanks,
Spencer
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf