Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008)

[John C Klensin]

--On Wednesday, 09 July, 2008 09:35 -0700 SM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>...
>> I can also find no authority, in RFC 2026 or elsewhere, for
>> the IESG adding text to a Standards-track document without
>> such consultation.  In particular, while Section 6.1.2 of RFC
>> 2026 contains an extended discussion of the IESG changing
>> categories, forming WGs, etc., it appears clear that the IESG
>> is to "approve or disapprove", not to start adding text
>> reflecting its own observations, observations that may or may
>> not represent community consensus.
> 
> At the moment, I cannot find any text from RFC 2026 which
> covers the area of disagreement.    RFC 3932 (BCP 92)
> discusses procedures and has some text about IESG notes.

But 3932 applies exclusively to independent submissions.  It has
nothing at all to do with Standards Track documents.

   john