Sean Donelan wrote:
The IETF (and other groups) developing "Best Common Practices" seem to sometimes forget
1. Is it a practice? 2. Is it a common practice? 3. Is it a best common practice?
If no one is doing it, and they are largely ignored, did the IETF really do its job of consulting with the operational community to identify practices that are common and considered best? It is the organizational version of "running code."
From my perspective if the people who need the BCP aren't the one's doing the writing then clearly something is going to be lost in
translation. Writing things down, presenting and accepting criticism on them doesn't require the blessing of standards body. If we're so rigid a culture that we're incapable of handling the documentation of operational wisdom informally yet we find ourselves bound to a standards body which we claim isn't serving our interests, whose fault is that?