Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC Editor liaison to the IAB? [was: Re: Comment on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-12])

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On 14. Mar 2022, at 17:12, John C Klensin <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Several recent discussions have left me concerned that we have
> not had a sufficient appreciation of the degree to which the new
> Model is an experiment without much precedent. 

And it is all waterfall design.

With a lot of wishful thinking (process confabulation, i.e., based on what some people think they and other people *should* be doing as opposed to what they are or will be actually doing).

Software projects that are set up this way usually fail spectacularly.
Fortunately, the new process will be run by humans, so we still have a chance that we will iterate out of the tarpits (and/or that people simply will ignore pieces of process to instead do the right thing).

This is all water under the bridge.
But we really have to be careful that we don’t ossify in a failed designed-in-a-vacuum state without a chance to get back to a process of continuous improvement.
The fact that the AUTH48 tweak (as just one placeholder for recent attempts to continue doing continuous improvement) was all but shouted down when subjected to unstructured discussion does not make me very hopeful, though.

Grüße, Carsten