IESG
Click on the red underlined text to get to the source
... mechanisms for process changes.
1. IESG has adopted a number of procedural changes on its own
initiative and documented them informally, utilizing the wide
discretion implicitly granted to them by [RFC2026 ...
... agreements. This document specifies regularizing and formalizing the
informal IESG mechanisms listed in 1 above as a means of moving
forward with procedural changes that might prove valuable.
...
... forward with procedural changes that might prove valuable.
The mechanisms outlined here add to the IESG's range of tools for
...
... tools rather than attempting to replace them with a single
"magic bullet". The choice of using the procedure outlined in this
document or other mechanisms available to the IESG and the community
-- present or future -- remains in the IESG's hands. If the IESG ...
... document or other mechanisms available to the IESG and the community
-- present or future -- remains in the IESG's hands. If the IESG
does not exercise this discretion wisely, this document provides no
...
... IESG and the community
-- present or future -- remains in the IESG's hands. If the IESG
does not exercise this discretion wisely, this document provides no
additional remedies.
...
... additional remedies.
Some have interpreted the current procedures as giving the IESG all
of the capabilities outlined here. If this were true, this document
only encourages the IESG ...
... IESG all
of the capabilities outlined here. If this were true, this document
only encourages the IESG to use this type of mechanism more
frequently in preference to less streamlined ones, and to more
explicitly document its actions and decisions.
...
... explicitly document its actions and decisions.
This specification permits and encourages the IESG to adopt and
institute "process experiments" by using the following procedure:
...
... experimental or evaluative criteria, although
highly desirable, are not required -- for some of the process
changes we anticipate, having the IESG reach a conclusion at the
end of the sunset period that the community generally believes
things to be better (or worse) will be both adequate and
...
... typically, not to exceed one year after adoption.
2. If the IESG believes the proposal is plausible and plausibly
useful, a four-week IETF Last Call is initiated. The IESG ...
... IESG believes the proposal is plausible and plausibly
useful, a four-week IETF Last Call is initiated. The IESG can
institute whatever procedures it wishes to make this determination
and to avoid denial of service attacks ...
... spurious or unimportant proposals. In particular, they might
institute a procedure requiring a number of endorsements, or
endorsements of a particular type, before the IESG considers the
proposal. The IESG is, however, expected to understand that
...
... endorsements of a particular type, before the IESG considers the
proposal. The IESG is, however, expected to understand that
procedures or review processes that act as a mechanism for
significant delays do not fall within the intent of this
...
... specification.
3. At the conclusion of the Last Call, the IESG reevaluates the
plausibility and appropriateness of the proposal. If they
conclude that the proposed experiment is appropriate, a second I-D
...
... plausibility and appropriateness of the proposal. If they
conclude that the proposed experiment is appropriate, a second I-D
is generated (either by the IESG or by the original authors with
IESG advice) that cleans up any definitional issues exposed in the
...
... is generated (either by the IESG or by the original authors with
IESG advice) that cleans up any definitional issues exposed in the
Last Call and that explicitly identifies and responds to issues
raised during the Last Call.
...
... Experimental RFC.
The IESG is explicitly authorized to use this mechanism (based on
Experimental RFCs) to gain experience with proposed changes to BCP ...
... have value.
The IESG could, of course, reach a "bad idea" conclusion at any stage
in this process and abandon the experiment. It might recommend
publication of the experimental ...
... group, or other mechanism could be
used in the first and/or third steps, but no specific mechanisms are
required, and the IESG is explicitly permitted to generate such
proposals internally.
...
... proposals internally.
In each case, the IESG's decision to go forward (or not) with a
procedural experiment, or the steps leading up to one, is expected to
reflect their judgment of the existence of rough consensus ...
... rough consensus in the
community. That judgment may be appealed using the usual procedures,
but the IESG and the community are reminded that an experimental
attempt to try something for a fixed period is typically a better
...
... particular time or of a specified age), or be specific in other ways.
At or before the end of the "sunset" timeout, the IESG would either
revise (or cause to be revised) the document into a BCP RFC or the
...
... real world.
We note that, if the procedures the IESG has adopted (and the
procedural exceptions it has made) over the last decade are
legitimate, then the IESG ...
... IESG has adopted (and the
procedural exceptions it has made) over the last decade are
legitimate, then the IESG has the authority to institute the changes
specified here by bootstrapping this process.
...
... security issues. In
considering experimental changes to procedures, the IESG should, of
course, exercise due caution that such changes not reduce the quality
of security ...