Re: Proposed resolution of the AD-shepherded info/experimental non-WGdocument issue

[Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>]

> I suggest that we add the following text to the IESG charter:
> 
> 	    When an AD decides that an Informational or
>             Experimental document is of particular importance to the
>             community, the AD may also choose to put it directly
>             before the IESG. This document will then be processed in
>             the same fashion as an Informational or Experimental
>             document from a working group.
> 
> And that we send a note to the RFC Editor saying that we have decided that 
> we want to have the corresponding arrow added to the RFC Editor's 
> flowchart. (or should that be "We ask the IAB to instruct the RFC Editor to 
> add...."?)
> 
> The only formal justification for it is that the relevant RFC 2026 
> paragraph says "should", not "must" be submitted to the RFC Editor. But as 
> several have said - we have done it before, and want to be able to do it 
> again.
> 
> Makes sense? All in favour - say AYE; all opposed - say NAY. :-)

AYE