Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: <draft-halpern-gendispatch-consensusinformational-02.txt> (IETF Stream Documents Require IETF Rough Consensus) to Best Current Practice

[Rob Sayre <sayrer@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

I didn't ask for any edits to your document in that message. I was just wondering what might happen to these documents, in the absence of a concrete example (which you refuse to provide).

For example, this draft could prevent publication of security technologies that disintermediate some vocal subset of IETF participants (like, say, router manufacturers). As I reflect on this draft, I am not sure it is a good idea. I could see it curbing process abuses, but I can also see it entrenching insecure protocols that people make money from exploiting. That's why I want to learn about some concrete examples.

thanks,

Rob

 

On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 3:11 PM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In my view, the question of how one could / may / should / might publish
a document that does not achieve IETF rough consensus is not the task of
this document.  The text simply observes that there are means outside of
the IETF stream to publish (some of) such documents as RFCs.

This is an IETF process RFC, not a publication tutorial.

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call