Latency

[Spencer Dawkins]

I agree with most of what Henning is saying, but am disturbed by one point - 

> [...] Almost any working group 
> has to now 
> go through a much longer chartering process, fairly extensive 
> 'requirements' and 'framework' documents, before the working group is 
> even allowed to talk about protocol development. This is a process 
> change which was (I believe) never really discussed and isn't really 
> documented.

How widespread is this perception? I have no idea WHY individuals in the IETF would think they were "not even allowed to talk about protocol development" before they go "extensive 'requirements' and 'framework' documents".

If the reality is more like "it's not worth my time to work on specifying a protocol outside the IETF", or "it's not worth my time working on a protocol until it's at least in a working group charter", that's different, and I've certainly traveled down this road at least once myself. But if people really think anyone in the IETF can stop them from talking about (and, hopefully, working on) protocol development, that's - well, it's a problem...

Do working group chairs think this? Does anyone on IESG? Why?

Spencer