[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: experimental/info process text in IESG charter

At 6:47 AM -0400 5/14/03, Thomas Narten wrote:

Can you resend yours? I'd like to try and close this topic again,
given klensin's mail to poised. He's calling on the text that is in
the document (as I would have expected him to...)

Thomas
Here's the text I proposed, and the reasoning I gave for not
liking the original.
Ted




NAY. I think the text diminishes the role of the document author in
proposing the work, and it does not deal well with the case where
an individual forwards an item to the IESG and the status changes
in-flight. From my perspective, one of the reasons to do this is
to take a document which came in with an eye on the standards track
and shift off the standards track, without forcing a proposer to
restart under a different process. This could be covered in 5.2.1
or here, but I think it belongs somewhere.

I'd suggest:

As noted in 5.2.1, any IETF participant may forward a document to
the IESG for consideration as a standards track document. Participants
may also forward a document to the IESG either with the intent that they
become Informational or Experimental documents or may agree that they
become Informational or Experimental after discussion with the IESG.
If a participant forwards a document to the IESG under this procedure,
one or more Area Directors must agree to take responsibility for the document.
Once an Area Director has taken that responsibility, the document will then be processed in
the same fashion as an Informational or Experimental document from a working group.
If no Area Director agrees to take responsibility, then the document may be
resubmitted through the RFC Editor for publication under that process.

regards,
Ted Hardie