>>> That bothers me a tiny bit. A missed downref could have security implications. >> >> I agree, but I contend that this doesn't make it any more likely that >> we'll miss a downref. In fact, this change is only operable when we >> *don't* miss it -- it simply gives the IESG judgment on whether last >> call needs to be repeated when we catch it. And the Security ADs will >> certainly have a say in that, if they think that broader review of the >> downref is warranted for security checking. > > True. How about s/related/directly related/ ? But I certainly don't insist. Well, as I think about it, I might just put in a note that references to immature protocols can have security implications, and that should be considered in deciding whether re-consulting the community is useful. b