My thoughts about the problems of the IETF

[Keith Moore]

> 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?

you know the blurbs that come with the announcements that IESG has
approved something or other?  the AD is filling in those blanks.
the AD is supposed to make assertions that the working group followed
the processes, and about the quality of the protocol and the document.

in other words the AD is supposed to explain why he/she is voting
"yes" for this protocol action, and why the document should be approved
in the absence of objections from other IESG folks.

Keith