Re: DNP note for draft-allan-mpls-loadbal

[Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>]

Harald,

  Makes sense. I will work with the chair on the official
  list of flaws.
  Thanks.

-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/

Tuesday, June 10, 2003, 12:03:16 AM, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:


> --On mandag, juni 09, 2003 23:46:12 -0700 Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com> wrote:

>> Harald,
>>
>>   [secretariat dropped]

> oops..sorry...

>>
>>   It's a "do not publish because it is a technically flawed
>>   thing attempting to end run" :) i.e., both. I was not sure
>>   how to express this. Suggestions are welcome.
>>

> the reason for blocking "end run" is "would harm the IETF process", and the 
> IESG is the best (?) judge of that.
> the argument for the IESG recommending DNP on technically flawed documents 
> is quite a bit weaker; I would like to rephrase this to include the reasons 
> why it would be a Bad Thing to publish it.

> suggested reformulation:

> Dear RFC Editor-

> The IESG has considered draft-allan-mpls-loadbal and has consulted
> the chairs of the MPLS WG. The subject of the draft is within the
> charter of the MPLS WG and was discussed by it. The discussion in the
> WG revealed serious technical issues in the approach described in the
> draft, which led to the WG rejecting the document.

> [insert specific technical flaws here]

> Therefore, the IESG recommends that the RFC editor does not publish this 
> draft.

> If the RFC Editor wishes to publish this despite the IESG's recomendation, 
> the IESG wishes the following IESG note to be placed upon it:

> IESG NOTE:
> This document was reviewed in the IETF MPLS WG, and was found technically 
> unsound. [insert synopsis of reason]
> The IESG does not recommend implementing this technology.