Re: "Fixing: the standards track or RFC series (was: Re: What do we mean when we standardize something?)

[Abdussalam Baryun <[e-mail]>]

On 5/30/13, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> difficult problems arise when someone comes to us with a spec
> that might be ok but isn't how we would do it and tries to say
> "you can have this and we will turn over change control as long
> as you don't really want to make any changes".  When a statement
> equivalent to that is justified on the basis of either being in
> a hurry or not invalidating existing implementations, we find
> ourselves in the middle of the contradiction between "consensus
> of industry practice" and "best engineering solution" for
> standardization.

If the standards proposed are reviewed well I don't think there will
be contradiction, I don't recommending always sticking to best
engineering solutions, because it is difficult to guarantee best
solutions in present/future (best practices ok). For industry request
work, IMO its better that our standards get into between *best
engineering practices* and *good engineering practices*, that will not
contradict with *consensus* and  *industry practices*.

AB