Definition of power and responsibility

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

--On tirsdag, mars 04, 2003 18:50:31 +0100 Brian E Carpenter 
<brian at hursley.ibm.com> wrote:

>> The IESG does NOT have the power to block publication of non-IETF
>> RFCs that are not on the standards-track.  Examples of non-IETF
>> RFCs include IAB documents, IRTF documents, and individual-submission
>> documents that are obviously unrelated to any IETF activity.
>> IESG can *recommend* to RFC-Editor that any document not be published,
>> but for the non-IETF documents, that is *advice* rather than an
>> *edict*.
>
> Correct, but the IESG does have the power to insert an IESG Statement
> in such an RFC, also known as a health warning. (No, that power is
> probably not documented in our process documents, but it's real
> enough.)

Oh yes it is.....
RFC 2026 section 4.2.3:

   If (a) the IESG recommends that the document be brought within the
   IETF and progressed within the IETF context, but the author declines
   to do so, or (b) the IESG considers that the document proposes
   something that conflicts with, or is actually inimical to, an
   established IETF effort, the document may still be published as an
   Experimental or Informational RFC.  In these cases, however, the IESG
   may insert appropriate "disclaimer" text into the RFC either in or
   immediately following the "Status of this Memo" section in order to
   make the circumstances of its publication clear to readers.

And before we claim that anything's undocumented about WG Chairs and 
editors, better have RFC 2418 (IETF Working Group Guidelines and 
Procedures) in recent memory!

One interesting thing I found when writing the IESG charter was that for 
almost every single piece of responsiblity or rule I felt I had to put in 
it, I could trace it back to an older document. And I left the pointers in 
there too, so anyone can check them out for him or herself...

                Harald