On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 4:35 AM, Scott O Bradner <sob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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 > The other piece to this is in RFC 2026, in the section on appeals: Further recourse is available only in cases in which the procedures themselves (i.e., the procedures described in this document) are claimed to be inadequate or insufficient to the protection of the rights of all parties in a fair and open Internet Standards Process. Claims on this basis may be made to the Internet Society Board of Trustees. By sending process documents to the ISOC Board on adoption, the IETF avoids the late surprise possibility that they will later be found to be "inadequate or insufficient". That doesn't eliminate the right of appeal (someone filing one may raise and issue that the Board didn't consider), but it does mean that there is some context when appeals occur. It may not be strictly required, in other words, but it is a good idea. My two cents, Ted Hardie > 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? >