Subject: Re: Last Call: 'The IESG and RFC Editor documents: Procedures' to BCP

From: [email-masked] (Scott Bradner)
Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 09:33:51 -0400 (EDT)

looks good to me - one suggestion of clearer language and a potential
addition

>   o  Documents for which special rules exist, including IAB documents
>      and April 1st RFCs, and republication of documents from other SDOs
>      - the IESG and the RFC Editor keep a running dialogue on which
>      documents these are

awkward wording - maybe you want to say

   o  The IESG and the RFC Editor keep a running dialogue on which
        documents require special rules (for example, IAB documents,
        April 1st RFCs, and republication of documents from other SDOs)

section 3
>    The IESG may return five different responses

this misses one of the outcomes listed in RFC 2026 - specifically (quoting
from 2026):
	"the IESG recommends that the document be brought within the
	IETF and progressed within the IETF context"

this path has been used from time to time and I think it is a valuable
option - I'd suggest that it be added as a 6th response

Scott

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf