On Jun 11, 2013, at 6:03 PM, Dave Cridland
<dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net<mailto:dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net>> wrote:
... and how would we judge IETF consensus on a document that doesn't get done
under a charter (which would in turn have been granted consensus without any
IETF comments?)
I would expect that you'd start with a mailing list, see if there is interest,
come up with a proposal for a BOF, come up with a working group charter, get
IESG review on the charter, then get IETF consensus on the charter, and then
start working on the document. That's how it's usually done.
BTW, the fact that a few people think the process ought to work differently
does not mean there is consensus for it to work differently. Also, what there
may not be consensus on among the people who have weighed in on the topic is
whether positive statements in favor of a document are relevant in IETF last
call, but I don't really know how to reduce that to practice, because in
reality I think it is rare for a quorum of IETF participants to read a document
as a consequence of a last call announcement. Without that, I don't see how
you can have any other last call process than the one we currently have.