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]>]

Hi Joel,
At 02:57 PM 24-01-2020, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>The reason this document does not directly update the boilerplate is 
>that the last revision of the boilerplate RFCs explicitly said that 
>from now on the IAB updates the boilerplate without needing a new 
>RFC to do so.  Hence, this document is only concerned with 
>tightening the rules, not writing the boilerplate.

Ok.

>With regard to updating 2026, this updates the text in 2026 that 
>permits informational or experimental RFCs without IETF rough 
>consensus.  it removes that permission from the IETF stream.  I do 
>not know how to clarify the document in this regard.

What you are attempting to do is, in my opinion, about IETF Stream 
policy.  There isn't a written policy as such for that Stream.  One 
alternative is for the IESG to issue a statement to affirm its 
intention not to publish non-standards track documents if it believes 
that there isn't rough consensus to publish.

There is a point which Mr Sayre made about transparency.  One of the 
advantages of operating in a transparent manner is that it helps the 
public to determine, for example, whether a person is acting in good faith.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy