Re: [perpass] draft-grothoff-iesg-special-use-p2p-names-00

[Stephane Bortzmeyer <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 04:48:26AM -0800,
 SM <[e-mail]> wrote 
 a message of 18 lines which said:

> The intended status is "IESG Approval".  I read the usual IETF
> documentation.  I could not find any mention of an IESG Approval
> document specification.

RFC 5226      

IESG Approval - New assignments may be approved by the IESG.
            Although there is no requirement that the request be
            documented in an RFC, the IESG has discretion to request
            documents or other supporting materials on a case-by-case
            basis.

            IESG Approval is not intended to be used often or as a
            "common case"; indeed, it has seldom been used in practice
            during the period RFC 2434 was in effect.  Rather, it is
            intended to be available in conjunction with other policies
            as a fall-back mechanism in the case where one of the other
            allowable approval mechanisms cannot be employed in a timely
            fashion or for some other compelling reason.  IESG Approval
            is not intended to circumvent the public review processes
            implied by other policies that could have been employed for
            a particular assignment.  IESG Approval would be
            appropriate, however, in cases where expediency is desired
            and there is strong consensus for making the assignment
            (e.g., WG consensus).