[ih] Cluster Addressing and CIDR

[John Day]

>.
>
>Yes, but the process becomes increasingly formalised - originally RFCs
>were informal and barriers to publication were low. Now RFCs are
>formal and the draft process formalises the documents while rasising
>the barrier to publication as an RFC.

That is more because for some Orwellian reason Requests for Comments 
became Standards and Internet Draft (which sounds like a preliminary 
standard) become comments.  But we have hashed that issue before 
elsewhere.  It is still pretty informal.

>
>I've increasingly seen draft deltas go to a small off-WG audience
>before popping up when submitted as an 'official' draft just before a
>meet closing deadline; I'm not sure that this is good, since it limits
>on-list discussion before the meet.

But it is typical behavior as committees age, the participation 
broadens, and people participating are playing their own agendas. 
This one of the oldest games in the book.

>
>I'm worried that the process will even become more formal still, if:
>
>http://ftp.ietf.org/iesg/iesg.2002-12-12
>IP     o Thomas to write (or cause to be written) a draft on "how to
>          get to Draft"
>
>is anything to go by.

My experience is that formality creeps in primarily as the process is 
abused.  The more it is abused the more necessary it is to make rules 
about things where it could be assumed that good and fair behavior 
would prevail.  As the stakes increase, that becomes less the case. 
The only way for it not to happen is to work on things that few 
people care about!  Either because they don't know it is important or 
because it isn't!

Take care,
John