I think the proposed standard push is probably due that we don't have
proper modern documentation statuses for today's avalanche of
communications methods. I had once suggested that we might need a
status called "Internet Method" (IM) that is not a standard but its
also not an experiment and we wish it to be stronger than information
status. The current PS status generally trumps all other ideas and
work within the IETF. There is no competition any more for ideas.
However, we have brilliant folks out there that simply wish to
document, get on the record, and/or propose a new or enhanced method
of doing things. It really doesn't have a "standard" per se that
requires such a high bar and threshold of endorsements across the
board. Because of that high threshold, I believe there has been a
tendency to "rubber stamp and fast track" things that has became
highly skeptical for many.
My view.
On 8/5/2015 5:38 PM, Hector Santos wrote:
+1, the few times I have it happen, it wasn't impressive at all, but
made you more cynical of the recent more tolerated IETF process of
"rubber stamping" and "fast tracking" documentation production,
RFC documents are made pretty fast now, and now a good bit are
proposed standards! Why bother with Informational and Experimental
any more -- a waste of time.
--
HLS