John:
Speaking pragmatically, I believe that creating a binding inter-stream appeal process probably requires reopening both 4846 and 4844 and, given many of the comments on the IETF list about the previous drafts, would lead to our having to recycle the discussion of the appropriateness of the role of the multiple-stream model and whether the IESG gets a "first among equals" role or better. I don't believe that repeating that discussion yet again would serve the community well and that is another big argument for the advisory approach.
I think everyone agree that the IAB has an oversight role here. Many of the people on this list have already advocated the need for an appeals process to resolve disagreements about the content of notes suggested by the IESG. This is not about the content of the document itself. If it were, then I could understand your concern, but it is only about the content of the note.
Russ
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf