Re: [Gendispatch] New Version Notification - draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04.txt

   *  Last Call discussions of proposed protocol actions now take place
      on the IETF Last Calls mailing list [LAST-CALLS].

Document actions also, not just protocol actions.

   Apart from appointing SAAs, the IETF Chair should divorce themselves
   from the day-to-day operation and management of the SAA team.

I find "divorce themselves" to be an odd phrase, and suggest instead,
"the IETF Chair should stay away from the".

   Because an SAA serves at the discretion of the IETF Chair - even if
   the IETF Chair is not otherwise involved in the operation of the SAA
   team - any SAA decision could be appealed to the IAB.  The IAB shall
   then review the situation and attempt to resolve it in a manner of
   its own choosing.

Why are we varying from the normal appeal process here?  One reason to
keep the IETF Chair out of the operation is exactly so the first
appeal *can* go to the IETF Chair, as it normally would.  Then to the
plenary IESG, and then to the IAB.  I don't see a good reason to
change that process.

-- 
Barry

On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 8:07 AM <internet-drafts@ietf.org> wrote:
>
>
> A new version (-04) has been submitted for draft-eggert-bcp45bis:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04.txt
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04.html
>
>
> The IETF datatracker page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eggert-bcp45bis/
>
> Diff from previous version:
> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04
>
> IETF Secretariat.
>
>
> --
> Gendispatch mailing list
> Gendispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch