--On Tuesday, September 01, 2009 16:37 +0300 Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Robert, > >> the IESG should not be making any kind of technical review of >> independent submissions > > Right, and we are not. > >> - the reason the review was even permitted ... was to allow >> work that was submitted independently but which was directly >> in the same area as IETF work to be merged, and all >> considered together. > > That is indeed the primary goal of the 3932 and 3932bis. I.e., > promote independent work, but allow a check in the exceptional > case that it collides with IETF work. And that is, again, the answer to the question you raised. In the context of Headers and Boilerplates, the stream is identified. Many will pay attention or learn to do so. Others will not, but, for them (regardless of their motivation), there is no evidence that "notices" in obvious front-matter boilerplate will be noticed either. If members of the IESG have technical issues with a document, let them raise them as interested, skilled, and persuasive individuals as both the current and proposed revised versions of 3932, and your comment above indicate that they should. If they have major philosophical disagreements, let them write critical commentary, with explanations and details, and see if they can get them published as RFCs. Independent of their ability to use the IETF Track to self-publish, I have never, in the history of the RFC Series, seen the RFC Editor turn down a competently written and clear criticism of another document -- IMO, in the last decade or two, there have been far too few such submissions. Conversely, independent of technical substance, if the document is not clear enough about what it is --from the text-- tell the RFC Editor (ISE) and thereby promote a discussion with the authors about changes to make the document more clear. If the ISE ignores that advice, we quite frankly have a more serious problem. But I've never, and I mean never, seen that happen. To rephrase what others have said, attaching derogatory notes without explanations or specific attribution is the act of lazy people who either cannot or will not take responsibility for making document-specific comments that can either be attributed to those making them or that have been through enough process to represent IETF consensus. john _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf