Re: [Pesci-discuss] Fw: (from Techspec) Non-Author Editing

>>>>> "Scott" == Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> writes:

    Scott> Sam sed:
    >> I don't think this is true.  I think an IETF consensus can and
    >> should be able to change the text of a WG draft over a WG
    >> objection.

    Scott> in theory this sounds like a Good Thing because I think it
    Scott> would result in the best technology & standards but moving
    Scott> from theory and real process could be tricky.

I think we disagree about what 2026 says.  I do agree with you that a
WG needs to have rough consensus to publish something as a WG
document.  However if the outcome of an IETf last call is that "foo
must become bar," then that document's not moving until foo becomes
bar.  If the WG doesn't like it, well, we can probably find someone to
take the same text and submit it as an individual submission.

_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss