--On Saturday, August 06, 2011 07:15 -0700 Bob Hinden
<bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
If a document no longer has anyone watching it, there's a
reasonable concern that it no longer has much constituency.
In that case, it's better to treat it as immature rather
than mature.
In order to have reached Draft Standard, the w.g. must have
shown multiple implementations. In at least one case I can
think about the protocol is very widely used operationally.
The working group is disbanded, only the mailing list remains.
The protocol is very mature and stable. It's only the IETF
activity that is inactive.
Moreover, if the community that produced the Draft Standard came
to the IETF for the purpose of working on the particular
specification (and, presumably, its predecessors), decided they
were finished, and went away, perhaps after seeing it widely
deployed, there may be an even stronger argument for moving it
to Internet Standard than would be the case if there are still
people around and messing with it.
You can't measure maturity of a protocol at draft standard by
looking at the IETF activity.
Right.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf