Re: [Icar] Thoughts on ICAR direction

Note that we have not waited for the working group to even fully approve 
the document before trying to make the experiment happen.

My concern, speaking personally, is that the community does not seem very 
interested in actually seeing a well defined pool of early reviewers happen.

Yours,
Joel

At 11:42 PM 11/7/2004, Spencer Dawkins wrote:
>In all fairness, ICAR was chartered pre-July14, so the only "legal" way 
>forward was to develop a full BCP before implementing the BCP procedures 
>to find out if they actually work! July14 - now approved as BCP 93, RFC 
>3933 <draft-klensin-process-july14-02.txt>, and coming soon to an RFC 
>mirror near you - has as its goal gathering experimental experience with 
>process changes before publishing the usual BCP document - and 
>specifically calls out opportunities for trials in one or two corners of 
>the IETF, rather than mandating deployment to the entire IETF community at 
>once, as a normal BCP document would do. So, I agree completely.

_______________________________________________
Icar mailing list
Icar@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar