> I'm happy to include IRTF and ISE; their omission was a simple > oversight. But even if we expand my statment to say "The primary way > the RFC editor adds value is by publishing IAB/IETF/IRTF/ISE > documents", then wouldn't the natural course be, for example, for the > owners of those streams to collectively oversee the RFC editor? as those august bodies oversaw postel, braden, ... oh wait. this all looks to be a sequel to the rfc++ bof. it's trumpian times, if one can not win the argument, escalate and destroy. randy
