a few comments on the IESG proposal:
from draft-iesg-rfced-documents-00.txt
2. Background material
The review of independent submissions by the IESG was prescribed by
RFC 2026 [1] section 4.2.3 and RFC 2418 [2] section 8. RFC 3710 [3]
section 5.2.2 describes the spring 2003 review process; with the
publication of this document, that section is no longer relevant to
documents submitted via the RFC Editor.
fwiw - I think that this proposal is completely compatible with the intent
of RFC 2026 section 4.2.3 and with the practice of the IESG at the time
that RFC 2026 was approved.
I do worry about the "harm to the Internet" case (e.g., a protocol which
will be used to transport large amounts of data but does not have any
congestion control ability) but I'm satisfied with the process described
in this ID to bring any such issue to the attention of the RFC Editor and
rely on the RFC Editor to do the right thing as long as the RFC Editor
maintains the model of today (an independent technically competent
group). If that model changes this process might have to be reevaluated
as long as the RFC Editor contunues to have s part of its mission to
publish non-IETF documents (as I strongly think it should).
nit: I do not think that RFC 2418 sec 8 has anything to do with the topic
of RFC Editor documents and I think that reference should be removed from
this document.
I think this is a good retro-move.
Scott