On Aug 31, 2009, at 6:14 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
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.
Can't the IETF can have a consensus that a non-IETF document relates
to other IETF work in some way?
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.
How would you expect the RFC editor to evaluate such a request? Under
what circumstances would it be reasonable to refuse to include it?
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf