> The problem is, the ADs are very busy people, and their expertise has to > cover a wide range of topics, so there will be few IESG members who can > really understand a subtle issue. Document reviews outside of one's > subject area are very difficult and require considerable focus. GIven > that, even if only one AD catches a flaw in a document, there's a good > chance (though not a certainty of course) that it's something that warrants > more attention. It's far more likely that no ADs will find the flaw My point isn't that I expect multiple ADs to find the same problem initially. What I expect to happen is that, say, Keith finds a flaw and lodges a DISCUSS position. It's discussed, and the WG insists that it's not a problem and shouldn't be changed. Keith maintains the DISCUSS, and it's gone over on the telechat. At the end of that, Keith still maintains the DISCUSS. More discussion among Keith, the responsible AD, and the WG ensues, and it's still not resolved -- the WG still refuses to change the spec, and Keith still maintains the DISCUSS position. It's at THAT stage that at least one other AD should have read the document, read Keith's DISCUSS position, and agreed with Keith. That's not a very high bar. And *that* is where I say that if there's still no one backing Keith's DISCUSS, even with his *asking* other ADs to have a look, Keith needs to back down. Barry _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf