On 5/16/13 2:58 PM, Keith Moore wrote:
On 05/16/2013 04:46 PM, Yoav Nir wrote:
The time for asking whether the group has considered making this
field fixed length instead of variable, or whether RFC 2119 language
is used in an appropriate way, or whether the protocol is extensible
enough is at IETF last call.
Actually the time for asking these questions is long before IETF-wide
Last Call. We need widespread review of proposals for standards-track
documents long before a WG thinks it's finished with those
documents. It's a gaping hole in our process.
As a Chair and as an AD I have asked for external and cross area reviews
of some documents before they were considered for WG acceptance. this
doesn't apply to all work we processed but it does apply to those where
we were clear that such input was going to be useful. One case you can
see for that today is with capwap extensions that are potentially in
opsawg.
Fix that problem, and most of the conflicts between IESG and WGs that
surround DISCUSS votes will go away.
Maybe but I wouldn't take that as an article of faith. You're going to
get pressure for more changes when fresh eyes review something.
Keith