On Jun 10, 2012, at 9:00 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Oh, one thing I now realise is that the draft doesn't state that > the editor (in deciding what changes to adopt) and the IESG > (in approving an update) will of course do so by a normal IETF > consensus process (presumably ad hoc last calls) and subject > to appeal like anything else. This is so obvious in the IETF > context that I didn't even notice that it wasn't stated. It is not what was intended. - There was no mention to me of "ad hoc last calls", so I did not include them in the draft. - Is there an appeals process for the content of the various web pages created by the IESG? --Paul Hoffman