[ih] "The Internet runs on Proposed Standards"

[Brian E Carpenter]

On 02-Dec-22 19:25, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> On 2. Dec 2022, at 03:16, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>> In any case, the formal "STD" designation doesn't really mean much.
> 
> I don’t quite agree.  This inconspicuous label has helped provide motivation for some significant efforts that led to tremendously improved specifications.
> Going to STD is pretty much the only IETF activity that creates legitimate space for considerable reflection.
> 
> That said, I’d say that the *absence* of the formal “STD” designation doesn’t really mean much.
> The fact that we label our regular-quality specifications “Proposed Standard” is highly misleading to people not familiar with the arcana of the process.
> If I were tasked to name the single most damaging self-inflicted feature of the process, this would probably be that label.

Since this is the history list, I will limit myself to observing that there have been several attempts in recent history to reduce the standards track to a single stage, and it seems that interest in this question and energy to discuss it is approximately zero.
See the above subject header.

     Brian