Russ,
On 26-Jan-20 06:26, Russ Housley wrote:
> Joel:
>
> It seems to me that you would need to pot other things that are in this IESG statement into the BCP that updates RFC 2026. You are really building on top of the procedure that are required by the existing IESG statement. For example, RFC 2026 does not require an IETF Last Call for an informational or experimental document at all.
More pedantically, BCP 9 does not require an IETF Last Call for an informational or experimental document at all. When this draft is approved, BCP 9 will do so, because that's how we determine IETF rough consensus. That is rock solid, whereas an IESG statement can always be reversed.
I agree that we will still depend on the IESG's assessment of IETF rough consensus, but there is no way round that.
(BCP 9 is irrelevant for non-IETF documents, since it defines IETF process.)
Brian
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
