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

[Rob Sayre <[e-mail]>]

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 <[e-mail]> 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.
>