Martin,
On 01/15/2013 02:10 AM, Martin Rex wrote:
John Leslie wrote:
...
But more to the point, I think that in a lot of cases where
the IETF has done a good job, there has been running code
before the WG even started...
This perhaps explains where Stephen is coming from. Such
cases do exist; and it is arguable that the process Stephen has
describe in this draft are well-suited to such cases (though I
would still have to quibble about some details).
I remain unconvinced, however, that fast-tracking the cases
that start from running code is a good use of WG efforts. Such
cases seem better suited to Independent Submissions from a
design team (which would _greatly_ speed the process). When
a WG is formed, IMHO, they should be encouraged to look at the
problem from some quite different angles, in search of a way
to "Simplify!".
I also believe that being more honest about something that is
more a design team effort than the result of more traditional
WG work should probably carry through that notion of an
Independent Submission, and, when being fast-tracked, that it
is essentially a request for rubber-stamping.
Oh come on. That seems like a fairly wild exaggeration. Please
explain how this experiment as documented in this draft could
lead to some new way to get things "rubber stamped." If it did
have that effect then I'd be against it, but that just seems
like nonsense to be honest.
S.
-Martin