On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 2:16 PM Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 19-Oct-21 08:36, Salz, Rich wrote:
> So I’m notice that a single-author AD-sponsored BCP revision is
getting a relatively lot amount of pushback on one particular area from a
number of very experienced IETFers (to be clear: other than me).
>
>
>
> Perhaps an AD sponsoring a BCP written by another AD is not the best way forward for something that has such a broad impact.
ADs (or recent IESG alumni) tend to be the subject matter experts on arcana of the standards process. I think it's entirely to be expected that they will draft process documents, and very likely that they will be motivated to do so.
As this discussion shows, there is plenty of daylight on what they are doing, so I don't see any harm.
"plenty of daylight" and the doc hasn't even properly advanced to IETF LC yet (awaiting an update), so I think there will still be plenty of time for community review.
