John:
Speaking pragmatically, I believe that creating a binding
inter-stream appeal process probably requires reopening both
4846 and 4844 and, given many of the comments on the IETF list
about the previous drafts, would lead to our having to recycle
the discussion of the appropriateness of the role of the
multiple-stream model and whether the IESG gets a "first among
equals" role or better. I don't believe that repeating that
discussion yet again would serve the community well and that is
another big argument for the advisory approach.
I think everyone agree that the IAB has an oversight role here. Many
of the people on this list have already advocated the need for an
appeals process to resolve disagreements about the content of notes
suggested by the IESG. This is not about the content of the document
itself. If it were, then I could understand your concern, but it is
only about the content of the note.
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf