Re: draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis and the optional/mandatory nature of I

On Sep 8, 2009, at 4:13 PM, Polk, William T. wrote:

> I believe Sam's suggestion offers a good compromise position: if the  
> IESG
> and RFC Editor do not come to an agreement, we should last call the  
> proposed
> IESG Note and let the community determine whether (1) this is an  
> exceptional
> case meriting a note and (2) if the text accurately clarifies the
> relationship.

Which community, The IETF community or the wider RFC community? And  
who calls the consensus?


--Olaf


________________________________________________________

Olaf M. Kolkman                        NLnet Labs
                                       Science Park 140,
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/               1098 XG Amsterdam

PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf