Technical Summary
Describes the procedure for non-WG drafts sponsored by an Area Director
Working Group Summary
During IETF Last Call discussion, several points were raised:
1. Is a two week last call sufficient for this type of document?
Response: Yes, since this was proposed for Informational. However,
it will not be on the IESG agenda until 4 weeks after the last call,
and late comments will be considered.
2. If it is a process document it should be a BCP. If not,
it should be an ION.
Repsonse: The IESG will discuss this explicitly before
deciding how to proceed.
3. One objection was raised to changing from publication requests
being sent to the IESG as a whole to being sent to a single AD.
Response: The IESG believes this will be more efficient, and
that the appeals process offers protection against any abuse.
4. One comment was received that this just adds to the complexity
of process documentation.
Response: Nevertheless this gap needs to be filled.
Protocol Quality
Reviewed by Brian Carpenter. Describes current practice with minor
changes.
Note to RFC Editor
(Insert note to RFC Editor here)
IESG Note
(Insert IESG Note here)
IANA Note
(Insert IANA Note here)