Standards Classification and Reality Problem Statement

john.loughney@nokia.com john.loughney@nokia.com
Mon, 16 Dec 2002 21:58:25 +0200


Hi Ran,

> Well, often the an I-D in a WG will need "substantial modification in =
form of basic
> design and contents".  If one reads James Kempf's note precisely, one =
can see that
> part of the concern is that in some WGs, once an I-D becomes an =
"official" I-D
> of the WG, it becomes well nigh impossible for the contents of that =
I-D=20
> to be evolved (regardless of WG consensus).  I've seen that several =
times,=20
> but maybe I don't have a clear grasp of how often it occurs across the =

> whole IETF.

Some document editors are less responsive than others, therefore the =
selection
process for editors should be considered (an informal process, though). =
Consulting
with ADs on this usually is a good idea.

> Now I would argue that if/when such happens, this means that the WG =
Chair and ADs
> haven't done their jobs, which include changing document editors if =
some document
> editor doesn't actually edit the I-D to reflect WG rough consensus...

I agree that if & when it happens, it is first a problem with the chairs =
& should
be followed up with the ADs. =20

John