On 2009-09-01 05:56, Ben Campbell wrote:
>
> On Aug 31, 2009, at 11:39 AM, Brian Rosen wrote:
>
>> Yes, I understand, this only applies to the Independent Submission
>> stream.
>>
>> We ask the IESG to review these documents, and that review is technical.
>>
>> I don't think it is appropriate for an editor to make a judgment of
>> whether
>> a technical note is, or is not appropriate to be included in a
>> document. I
>> think the presumption should be that it is appropriate, and the
>> authors have
>> a way to object. While I understand the role of the ISE is somewhat
>> different from the RFC Editor, I understand the role to be primarily
>> editorial and we are not choosing the ISE with regard to their ability to
>> make judgments like whether the IESG note is appropriate or not.
>>
>> I think it would be okay to have the note go through an IETF consensus
>> call.
>>
>
> +1 , including the "IETF consensus call" part.
I don't understand how IETF consensus is relevant to a non-IETF document.
In fact the answer to Jari's question appears to be a matter of logic,
not of opinion. The IESG, which acts for the IETF, logically cannot
determine anything about the contents of a non-IETF document. So the
inclusion of an IESG note can only be a request.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf