On 5/16/13 4:07 PM, Ralph Droms wrote:
On May 16, 2013, at 5:58 PM 5/16/13, Keith Moore
<moore(_at_)network-heretics(_dot_)com> 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.
Hear, hear.
One suggestion I've heard several times is a kind of cross-area buddy
system (e.g., ask or assign someone with clue in Area X to help WG Y in
Area Z early and often with regard to specific issues that are often
addressed in Area X). Unfortunately, this suffers from the same problem
that too many WGs suffer from on their own: participant burnout. But I
still think it's a good idea...
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/