Adoption [was: Re: Adoption Call for "Improving the Robustness of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) to Flash Renumbering Events" ]

[[e-mail]]

Brian,

>> First of all I agree that we do have a problem with flash renumbering
>> and it would be desirable to make the protocol more robust.
>> However I have some reservations about the changes proposed by the
>> draft and I do not support the adoption in its current form.
>> (I'd disagree with the argument that 'adopting does not mean the draft
>> will be published as it is so let's adopt it and figure out the
>> content later'. IMHO adopting the draft means that the WG agrees with
>> the proposed standard changes in principle and is willing to work on
>> polishing the details.
> 
> No, that isn't what it means. In fact it's rather undefined what
> "adoption" means, but the most important thing it means is that
> change control moves from the authors to the WG. So the WG can choose
> to polish the draft a bit, or to completely change the proposal,
> or to drop it after another year of discussion.

I agree that a move of change control is what we want.
My own thoughts from observing the process:

This might be more what should happen in theory rather than what actually happens in practice.

There are several reasons for that I would imagine. One being the practice of documents having individuals named as authors.

I have tried to move the needle on change control somewhat with the use of SCM and github, but so far it's too early to tell if that makes a difference.

It's also very hard to un-adopt a document when it's first been adopted.
Given that, it is no surprise that the barrier to adoption is high and potentionally increasing over time.

Cheers,
Ole