I do but don't care. With my IETF hat on, the whole point of the cut-off is to
enforce a physical barrier to ensure we do not ever hear, "I posted this draft
yesterday, let's talk about it" in a work group. With my legal services hat on,
with the US joining the rest of the world with first-to-file, those few weeks
of publication could mean the difference between a free and open standard and a
NPE swooping in and attempting to tax the industry.
On Mar 7, 2013, at 5:56 AM, Stephen Farrell
<stephen(_dot_)farrell(_at_)cs(_dot_)tcd(_dot_)ie> wrote:
On 03/07/2013 09:34 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
Oh, and one more data point:
The Internet-Draft archive also functions as a timestamped signed public
archival record of our "inventions".
(Which are often trivial, but triviality won't stop patenting of copycats,
while a good priority more likely will.)
FWIW, I think that's an incidental good side-effect but shouldn't
drive what we do here.
My take is that I don't care about this, so long as drafts that
are discussed at meetings are posted early enough to allow folks
a chance to read them. The current rule achieves that well enough,
as could a less coarse-grained rule. I've not seen a worked out
proposal for such a less coarse-grained rule that achieves that
yet.
S
This function is effectively suspended for six weeks a year.
Grüße, Carsten
PS.: (If that sounds like I'm contradicting myself that's only because we
haven't found the right solution yet.)
On Feb 27, 2013, at 19:49, Carsten Bormann <cabo(_at_)tzi(_dot_)org> wrote:
On Feb 27, 2013, at 19:18, ned+ietf(_at_)mauve(_dot_)mrochek(_dot_)com
wrote:
routing around obstacles
It turns out for most people the easiest route around is submitting in time.
That is actually what counts here: how does the rule influence the behavior
of people.
Chair hat: WORKSFORME. (And, if I could decide it, WONTFIX.)
Grüße, Carsten