Document Blocking (Was: I-D

[Aaron Falk]

Keith Moore wrote:
> > 
> > generally when an AD keeps their "discuss" after the IESG
> > teleconference there is some level of consensus in the IESG that the
> > issues raised are real and do need to get fixed - in this case it is
> > generally the case that other ADs to not also vote "discuss" to
> > indicate their agreement, they delegate one AD as the discuss holder -
> > that AD will evaluate the document changes and give a OK when they are
> > happy - i.e. the fact that only one security AD is recorded as having
> > a discuss on a document should not be read to say that the rest of the
> > IESG does not support that discuss
> 
> maybe now that the votes are being publicized the IESG might want to
> consider changing that.  it was handy to have only one discuss holder
> because only one vote had to be changed to move the document forward.
> but now perhaps it would be useful for IESG to separate the notion of
> "who thinks this document has problems" from the notion of "who has the
> token to say when the problems with this document are fixed"

This seems like a good suggestion.

--aaron