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]>]

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 6:21 PM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 6:06 PM Rob Sayre <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 5:56 PM Joel M. Halpern <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> This document makes no change to the interaction of the IESG with other
>>> streams.  It is strictly about the IETF stream.  As such, the rest of
>>> this is out of scope for the document.
>>>
>>> As a matter of documented procedure, the IESG can request various things
>>> of the IRTF stream or the Independent Stream, but can not block
>>> publication.  (For example, they can request non-publication of
>>> Independent Stream documents, but the final decision rests with the
>>> ISE.)  This is either a feature or a bug, depending upon a lot of other
>>> views one has.
>>
>>
>> Sure, I just think there's an angle here that's not being considered. I
>> agree with the goal of the document.
>>
>> Maybe also give the IESG a SHOULD requirement to recommend one of the
>> RFC 5742 nastygrams detailed in section 3 of that
>> document, should publication be requested on another stream.
>>
>
> You should feel free to propose this via the GENDISPATCH process, but
> that's not what this document is about. It has nothing to do with the ISE.
>

A close reading of RFC 5742, something I suggest the authors undertake,
would show this not to be the case.

thanks,
Rob