On Thursday, Jan 23, 2003, at 09:53 America/Montreal, Harald Tveit
Alvestrand wrote:
Ran,
can we take this to the IPR list?
it's obviously not something the IESG is going to make clear on its
own.
I'm happy to mention the issue to the IPR list in due course, though
it still is not obvious why an IETF IPR WG's charter would include the
process for RFC Editor publication of non-IETF documents (i.e. those that
aren't end-run attempts).
I'd prefer to get a sense of what the folks here happen to think about
the questions I posed -- which are specifically for non-IETF documents,
before we move to that list, if you don't terribly mind.
Part of my concern is that the primary question I'm raising is why
non-IETF documents need to jump through all of the same hurdles that
IETF documents have to jump through. Everyone sees the value in having
the IESG review non-IETF stuff to ensure there aren't end-runs happening,
but why there needs to be more than that for the non-IETF documents is
not obvious to (at least) some of us.
The RFC Editor is a function of the Internet Society. Its funding comes
from ISOC, and its operating instructions come from the IAB.