[Icar] Re: [Solutions] Summary of Discussion on Reforming IETF Quality Control Process

On Fri, 9 Jan 2004, James Kempf wrote:

> > What are the criteria for deciding whether a particular document
> > requires full IESG review?
>
> It is up to the IESG to decide that.

I want to clarify this because Margeret's question might be based on
the wrong assumption, possibly causing misinterpretation of the
correct answer.

There should be no "requires full IESG review" flag or state for any
document. IESG is not a special case when it comes to review. IESG or
any single AD can submit a review for any document that is up for
review, at any time. This is no different from any IETF participant
submitting a review. If IESG feels that a particular document needs
full IESG review, it is their internal business, invisible and
unpredictable to others (in general), until they submit a review. In
general, one does not know a priori whether a document will be
reviewed by IESG until the IESG submits the review.

Now, if there is a conflict that WG and a reviewer cannot resolve
despite all the negotiation efforts, then the document automatically
goes to IESG for the final conflict resolution. Such resolution may
require full IESG review, but it is internal IESG business how to
approach that. The final IESG decision is documented, of course. Note
that "a reviewer" above may be IESG (but it is not a special case).

Thus, IESG has special formal powers when it comes to conflict
resolution, but does not have (and does not need!) any special powers
or exceptions when it comes to document review. This scheme is both
simple and gives IESG full flexibility when it comes to selecting
"full IESG review" targets. We do not need to spend time documenting
what those targets might be.

Alex.

_______________________________________________
Icar mailing list
Icar@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/icar