How do you think things get proposed to organizations like the IETF? Someone comes up with a working implementation, proves it to work & to be better than the existing stuff, and then they propose it for inclusion.
That's what Google is doing, and they're using Google Chrome as their test bed (along presumably, with a bunch of non-Chrome stuff internally).
If what you're hinting at is that they should first start some wider discussion about what a next-gen UDP should look like before they start doing anything, then I suggest you look up "bikeshedding". Such a process would never get anywhere.
I appreciate their initiative and their wealth of engineering talent. I completely get what you're saying -- someone has to propose it; and a usable reference implementation is all the better. Unfortunately it seems, given Googles mammoth size, that many folks who might otherwise chime in simply shrug and go "oh, Google has already solved/implemented/popularized a solution" and move on.
That's not happening with SPDY, WebRTC, Dart, or WebP. Google's competitors are going over these proposals with the proverbial fine-toothed comb. I get the impression that people are extra skeptical of Google standards because of the potential to get steamrolled.
That's what Google is doing, and they're using Google Chrome as their test bed (along presumably, with a bunch of non-Chrome stuff internally).
This is the same thing they did with SPDY. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPDY#Relation_to_HTTP for details.
If what you're hinting at is that they should first start some wider discussion about what a next-gen UDP should look like before they start doing anything, then I suggest you look up "bikeshedding". Such a process would never get anywhere.