Hi Andrew
I think if the IETF has strong objections with engineering reasons, then it is already a NO. That document should not even get to IESG. We only need IESG decision (saying yes or no) when we all in IETF agree with consensus. All IETF WGs should adapt/amend their document to total IETF consensus (that is WGs interaction).
AB
On Thursday, March 27, 2014, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 07:34:22PM -0400, John Leslie wrote:
>
> The sad truth is, the IESG no longer has the spare cycles to "Just
> say No."
I was on the receiving end of an IESG that simply stalled a document
until the WG changed its approach, because of IETF concerns, so I
disagree with that claim. But if it is true, then we might as well
give up. If there's weak IETF consensus (with some strong objections)
to a document that comes from a WG and has strong consensus inside the
WG, the _only_ people who can say no are the IESG; and they must.
Best regards,
A
--
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx