For IETF LC (including comments after the LC ends), the relevant AD is
responsible for judging any comments. In practice, usually the authors
and chairs respond, but if there is some doubt it is up to the AD.
Yours,
Joel
On 3/12/2020 8:46 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi Joel,
At 05:19 PM 12-03-2020, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
SM, I have trouble understanding the question you are asking.
During and after the IETF LC, questions were asked about the document.
Being proactive, the WG (authors and chairs) have been proactive in
addressing the questions (many from the IESG). This seems to be not
only appropriate, but highly desirable. Given that the WG has been
copied on the emails about the topics and changes, if the WG objects
they can speak up.
What is it you are objecting to?
I asked a question about whether there was a step after the end of the
Last Call and the (beginning) of the IESG Evaluation. That is not
related to the discussion between the Working Group author(s) and IESG
members. In case it got missed, I submitted comments on the Last Call.
Mr Rescorla responded on one point. There were other points in my
comments. I didn't see any response to that from the Working Group.
I phrased the followed questions as simple as possible so that there is
less room for misunderstanding at the other end: Who assesses whether
the objection is valid or not? Who speaks on behalf of the Working Group?
I skipped over the "patently false" comment so as to avoid the usual
IETF unpleasantness.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
