Two different disagreements with you.
First, I did list adoption as well as last call. In adoption the chairs
can't very well look back at the adoption to see if there was really
support.
Second, it is the WG, not the document authors, that send a document to
the AD for IETF approval. if the only people who think the AD and IESG
should put in the work are the authors, how can the chairs say to the AD
"the WG supports this". At best, you would have to have a very
wishy-washy shepherd writeup. Particularly if it has been several years
since the adoption. Or worse, several years since the WG even touched
the document.
I do try to find alternatives before just giving up. Extending adoption
or last call windows, with prompting notes about the work (usually)
being in charter or even (when appropriate) how important the work is to
the overall goal.
Yours,
Joel
On 2/27/2020 2:41 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
On Feb 27, 2020, at 2:27 PM, Joel M. Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com
<mailto:j...@joelhalpern.com>> wrote:
Rather, the case where +1 can be useful is when the question is
whether the working group even cares about the document. I have had
several cases of calls for adoption or WG last call where there was
almost no response on the mailing list. In the absence of decent
indication, I as chair feel compleed to say "no, I do not see enough
support to adopt / advance / ... this document".
In that situation, even +1s can help. (And yes, I do watch for the
case of all the +1s coming from the same company as the author, and
then start judging whether they are folks who participate, along the
lines Warren outlined.)
In my experience this is actually the wrong thing to do. If the work
was chartered, and a bunch of people go off and do the work, and then by
the time the work is done the working group has lost momentum other than
those people, saying “Oh, I guess nobody cares, we won’t publish” is the
wrong outcome.
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
