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

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hello,
At 10:08 AM 24-01-2020, The IESG wrote:
>The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the
>following document: - 'IETF Stream Documents Require IETF Rough Consensus'
>   <draft-halpern-gendispatch-consensusinformational-02.txt> as Best Current
>   Practice
>
>The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
>comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
>[e-mail] mailing lists by 2020-02-21. Exceptionally, comments may

The usage of uppercase in Section 3 makes it look like the IETF only 
understands an absolute prohibition when it is written in 
uppercase.   Is that really necessary?

The current boilerplace (RFC 7841) states has the following text: "It 
represents the consensus of the IETF community".  Is there a reason 
why that that RFC if is not being update to match what Section 3 defines?

Which section of RFC 2026 will be updated?

An IETF participant is allowed to disagree with the IESG if he/she 
believes that the IESG is taking a bad decision by approving the 
publication of a document.  There hasn't been any such case in recent 
IETF history.  I don't understand the rationale for having such a 
significant change to address certain corner cases when there isn't 
any factual information about such cases.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy