On 2009-09-01 13:14, Ben Campbell wrote:
>
> 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?
Well, yes, but that's a decision we have historically chosen to
trust the IESG to take. I see no evidence that that has been a problem,
and I didn't think Jari was reopening that aspect.
>
>>
>> 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?
Well, in the future it will be the Independent Series Editor. I would
expect him/her to take such a decision just like an academic journal
editor would decide how to deal with a critical review. I'd expect that
in the large majority of cases, the ISE would agree to the request,
and would only consider refusing it if he/she concluded that the IESG was
showing unreasonable bias.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf