On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Ralph Droms
<rdroms(_dot_)ietf(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Adrian - I have to say I had an entirely different experience than you
apparently did with the IETF discussion of this document. Without
exhaustively reviewing the various threads, my recollection is that the
*content* of the document was mostly considered useful, while there was
significant disagreement with the *process* of publishing that content as a
BCP or (later) Informational RFC. I specifically don't recall any attempt
to ascribe anything but good intentions to the authors and I do recall many
descriptions of the content of the document like "very useful material" (my
own words).
I am (or was) also supportive of its publication as an Informational RFC.
Though I have never had or functioned as a WG secretary, I know some
co-chairs find it useful if not necessary to smooth operation of their
working groups. That being the case, RFC2418 clearly says too little about
this as-is.
I thus expressed support for the work and, relative to the comments of
others, I thought my points were quite resolvable.
-MSK