[rfc-i] Fwd: Comment on headers-and-boilerplates
rsayre at mozilla.com
Tue Dec 9 02:26:01 PST 2008
Leslie Daigle wrote:
> That is -- if the point of having additional text in the Independent
> Stream is to make it very plain that it is _independent_, then it is the
> only stream that really needs to say "This is not a product of the
> IETF"; and the text should be removed from the IRTF Stream; the IRTF is
> not completely independent of the IETF general process.
Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that the Independent
Stream isn't independent either. Section 5 of RFC 4846 documents the
process by which an independent submission is examined by the IESG. An
_independent_ stream would be free of such concerns, and free of IESG
review. The only difference between an independent submission and an AD
submission is the channel by which a document arrives at the IESG. The
boilerplate addition might as well say
"This document reached the IESG without prior private communication with
an IESG member."
So, I oppose the proposed addition to the boilerplate of the independent
stream. The text is inaccurate.
More information about the rfc-interest