Hi Ralph,
I would actually feel more comfortable with
ADs providing their technical judgment with the rest of us, through the
same mechanism: WG or IETF last call. And that technical judgment
should be expressed openly, in an archived WG mailing list, where
everyone's technical input can be reviewed and everyone who provides
technical input can be held accountable.
FWIW, this seems fairly easy to implement even now, with (1) The introduction of the tracker that records comments so that they can be accessed in a public manner. (2) The practise where DISCUSS comment resolution is brought back to the WG list (unless the comments are obvious and non- controversial enough to be simply put in by the editor).
Some WGs are doing this already. Just yesterday we had a discussion on the IPv6 list about one DISCUSS and how to resolve it.
--Jari
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf