Sam - The ISOC BoT has generally (with some slip-ups) accepted IETF process documents as describing the IETF process - this has been seen as a good idea for the insurance coverage there is no requirement in the IETF process that such RFCs be approved by the ISOC board nor that they are accepted as describing IETF process before the RFCs become active see, for example, Resolution 2006-36 http://www.internetsociety.org/who-we-are/board-trustees/list-resolutions Scott On Oct 26, 2012, at 7:20 AM, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>> "SM" == SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > So, I'm puzzled by this. my claim was that ISOC needed to approve > process related BCPs. If you take a look at RFC 2031, it supports that > claim. However, I'd kind of expect the other half of this to be in RFC > 2026. I certainly recall us sending things like BCP 101 before the ISOC > BOT. I also think we sent a couple of other documents there because they > were process documents. > However this is clearly more complex than I thought it was. > > Scott, or anyone else with more history, can you tell us a story about > how this works?