On 3/27/14, 4:41 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 07:34:22PM -0400, John Leslie wrote:
The sad truth is, the IESG no longer has the spare cycles to "Just
say No."
responsible AD here.
I take the IETF LC input with the gravitas that's appropriate. the IESG
review occurs after the LC.
I was on the receiving end of an IESG that simply stalled a document
until the WG changed its approach, because of IETF concerns, so I
disagree with that claim. But if it is true, then we might as well
give up. If there's weak IETF consensus (with some strong objections)
to a document that comes from a WG and has strong consensus inside the
WG, the _only_ people who can say no are the IESG; and they must.
Best regards,
A
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature