Re: draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis and the optional/mandatory nature of IESG notes

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Olaf,

I meant the IETF community.  Since the note would exist to clarify the
relationship with documents developed by the IETF community,  that seems the
right one to evaluate whether a note is needed.

As to who calls the consensus, that is a tricky one.  How about the IAB
chair?

Tim


On 9/8/09 10:36 AM, "Olaf Kolkman" <olaf@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> On Sep 8, 2009, at 4:13 PM, Polk, William T. wrote:
> 
>> I believe Sam's suggestion offers a good compromise position: if the
>> IESG
>> and RFC Editor do not come to an agreement, we should last call the
>> proposed
>> IESG Note and let the community determine whether (1) this is an
>> exceptional
>> case meriting a note and (2) if the text accurately clarifies the
>> relationship.
> 
> 
> Which community, The IETF community or the wider RFC community? And
> who calls the consensus?
> 
> 
> 
> --Olaf
> 
> 
> ________________________________________________________
> 
> Olaf M. Kolkman                        NLnet Labs
>                                         Science Park 140,
> http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/               1098 XG Amsterdam
> 

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]