The IETF's problems

[Keith Moore]

since most of this is not in scope for problem-statement - either it
is solution space or something else entirely - I'll make my public
reply brief, and reply privately in more detail.

- your proposed solutions for managing increased workload will not scale,
nor will they ensure technical soundness.
- you are being unrealistic in expecting IETF to take on every bit of
work for which there is interest, even if IETF doesn't give them a working
group
- it is not in the interests of the Internet, nor in the interest of IETF,
for IETF to support the efforts of governments to use the Internet for
surveillance.  no matter how well-intended, IETF will not be able to limit 
the efforts of governments who wish to use this capability inappropriately.
IETF work in this area can at best be a waste of its energy, and at worst 
lend support to corrupt governments.
- rough consensus is not a reliable indicator of protocol quality, nor a
sufficient condition for standardization.

and for the one topic relevant to problem-statement:

- I agree that with so many RFCs the distinction between the various
kinds of status is unclear.  however experimental and informational
RFCs are useful as supplemental material to standards documents, 
and for other purposes, so I do not agree with your proposed solution.