On Tue, May 26, 2026 at 12:48 PM Eliot Lear <[email protected]> wrote: > Eric: > On 26.05.2026 19:37, Eric Rescorla wrote: > > >> I don't see it as very different from IPR, where the IETF (appropriately) >> led the way, and the other streams followed. In this case, it just seems >> natural for the Editorial stream to lead. >> > > To you, perhaps, but not to me. > > Can you explain what you see as the natural differences on this between > streams? > First, "lead" is a mischaracterization of what is being proposed here because we are talking about the Editorial stream setting a global policy which the IETF Stream has to take positive action to opt out of. That's different from the IETF Stream doing something and other Streams adopting it on their own.
Second, I do not believe that the Editorial stream is an appropriate place to set this kind of policy. Ignoring questions about stream specificity, I think it's clear that there are substantive questions of policy here which should be resolved by IETF Consensus (or whatever process is appropriate to the Streams). I think the RFC 9280 process is fine for the limited scope of questions we have placed within its remit, but it is not IETF Consensus. -Ekr
-- rswg mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
