On 29/11/2012, at 3:32 AM, Eliot Lear <lear(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com> wrote:
On 11/28/12 12:57 PM, Randy Bush wrote:
I'm increasingly seeing a "paradigm" where the review happens _before_
adoption as a WG draft.
and one consequence is that the design gets done outside of the ietf
process.
But this isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's nice to have reasonably
well thought out ideas come in.
Which then become highly defined precepts that become incredibly resistant to
IETF change on the basis that they have been well thought out already (and
probably are IPR-ridden) and at that stage the IETF process is functionally
reduced to rubber stamping. At that stage the value of the IETF imprimatur
becomes highly dubious to the industry its meant to serve.
It's not clear to me if this idea of taking in 'mature' work is altogether a
good thing.