My thoughts about the problems of the IETF

[Ralph Droms]

Scott - exactly what does "override the consensus" mean?  Edit
the doc unilaterally before forwarding it to the IESG?  Refuse
to process the doc without the changes?  Raise additional issues
that the WG may not have considered?

My understanding is that an AD does a preliminary review before
the IESG sees a doc.  What is the AD looking for - editorial
changes, fundamental problems with the protocol?

- Ralph 

At 03:46 PM 4/17/2003 -0400, Scott Bradner wrote:
>> But what happens when an AD or IESG member tells a document editor
>> to change x, y & z before a draft can pass IESG review?  Is there
>> any way to appeal this?
>
>to be clear I'd say yes & no  :-)
>
>no - its not written into 2026
>yes - if someone appeals such a thing it would be really bad 
>        if the IESG &/or IAB were to rule it out of order rather than
>        address the issue
>
>but also - yes
>        if the AD says that and the WG specifically has consensus
>        a different way that it would be a process violation to
>        override the WG consensus
>     
>this might sound counter to what I posted earlier today but if
>a AD/IESG pushback to a WG for a security or danger-to-the-net
>issue can not get WG consus to fix then we are in a pile of problem
>
>Scott