--On Sunday, December 11, 2011 15:13 +0100 Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@xxxxxx> wrote: > I think it would have been wise if the author actually had > sent a review request to the link relation mailing list, first > (see <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5988#section-6.2.1>). Julian, Rather than seeing more of these procedural messages go back and forth, let me agree with you about "wise" but note that there is nothing in the procedures that prevents Mykyta from asking for an IETF Last Call on the document first if he wants to. I would suggest -- with some confidence even without actual certainty-- that, if the Link-Review list, or even the Designated Expert, sent in a Last Call comment suggesting (and explaining why) that this proposal was wonderful, or that it was deeply flawed, the IESG would pay lots of attention to that. A review that would justify one of those conclusions --or asking the IESG to send the document back for revision and suggesting that the IETF list see no more Last Calls until there had been adequate discussion on the relevant mailing list -- would seem to me to be a more useful use of energy than questioning the procedural path. My one procedural comment to the IESG would be that approving this before there is a proper agreement to put the necessary bits in the registry would be inappropriate and, to use Julian's term, unwise. john _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf