Re: [Rfcplusplus] IRTF stream considerations

[Jari Arkko <[e-mail]>]

First, on the primary topic of this thread, I believe thinking what
would be the best publication approach for the IRTF would be
a welcome activity, to optimise the channel(s) that they best
serve the researchers participating in IRTF.

Then on some other topics:

Brian wrote:

> What I mean is
> that *if* the IETF decides, by its own process, that the IETF wants
> to make a change, *then* the next stage must be a serious effort to
> discuss it with the rest of the community. Currently, we don't have a
> clear method for that.

I agree.

But want to note that discussion on rfc-interest list, discussions at
BOFs during IETF meetings, the plenary, and the like have 
traditionally been tools that we use when topics related to the 
RFC series are being discussed. Obviously, an effort should be
made to reach as far as possible when there’s a topic for
discussion. And as we know, a BOF or other gathering at
an IETF is not the final decision place, no matter what
gets discussed we’ll have to continue online for some more.

Many people talked about:

> controversial changes

FWIW, my perception of some of the past discussions is that
there was at least some level of controversy. You could perhaps
argue whether that was lower or higher level than on current
topic, but people seem to care about the RFC series and don’t
always have the same opinions. Which is a good thing :-)

Jari