Hi Scott and John,
I don't see this as inconsistent with the current 2-stage proposal,
if the latter's omission of a requirement for independent interoperable
implementations for stage 2 is corrected.
I don't, however, believe that the problems are separable.
The bar for PS has crept up, IMHO, precisely because the bar
for DS/STD has appeared too high to be readily attainable.
So I see two ways forward that hang together:
1. draft-bradner-restore-proposed +
(draft-housley-two-maturity-levels + independent interoperable implementations)
2. draft-loughney-newtrk-one-size-fits-all-01 (i.e. simply abolish
the second and third stages, and make interoperability reports optional)
I prefer #1.
Regards
Brian
On 2011-01-30 11:39, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
I've previously expressed my opinion that proposals to muck with the
number of steps in teh IETF standards process will no do anything
useful (i.e., will not be effective) - JOhn and I have just posted
what, to us, would be a prerequisite for amy process mucking proposal
to succeed
Scott
-----
From: Internet-Drafts(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
To: i-d-announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: I-D Action:draft-bradner-restore-proposed-00.txt
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Restoring Proposed Standard to Its Intended Use
Author(s) : J. Klensin, S. Bradner
Filename : draft-bradner-restore-proposed-00.txt
Pages : 6
Date : 2011-01-29
Restore the very low bar for Proposed Standard described in RFC 2026
(BCP 9)
A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bradner-restore-proposed-00.txt
Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf