Joel,
However, the devil is in the details.
As I understand it, the reason for calling the extra note
"exceptional" is that the IESG has in the past sometimes used that
note to place far more pejorative language than you suggest, in places
that it really does not belong. That can turn a reasoanble publicaiton
request into a political fight.
That's true. However, I think that 3932bis (any version) is already
supposed to reduce that problem, by not having standard, default
pejorative language.
The changes in -07 relate to the frequency of notes and their content.
I'm not sure the frequency matters for avoiding the pejorative language
problem. If the IESG puts in bad language, they can do so both in -06
and -07... if you want to solve that problem you need a couple of
things: first, remove the bad default language. Second, provide a better
instruction on what the note, if any, should contain. I think -07 is an
improvement in this respect, because it now talks about the relationship
of the RFC to IETF and pointers to standards track specifications.
Third, the IESG folk simply need to have good judgment about using the
notes. And if they don't, Nomcom should hear about it...
Jari
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf