--On 30. mars 2004 09:51 -0800 "Paul Hoffman / VPNC"
Requirement on the RFC Editor - doesn't sound unreasonable, but out
of scope for this document.
Not really. Currently, when the IESG reviews non-standards-track
documents, it makes a decision (or approves a request) for the status.
This document puts that decision into the RFC Editor's hands. It would be
good to give on-record advice for how the RFC Editor should make that
decision, particularly since the recent experiences with making things
Experimental are not consistent with the wording in 2026.
it would be good, but that's not the IESG's role .... it is the IAB's.
While the IAB has seen this document (and made encouraging noises), it is a
document from the IESG, saying how the IESG intends to behave (and how it
expects future IESGs to behave, once the IETF consensus that this procedure
makes sense). I'd like to keep it at that....