[rfc-i] [irtf-discuss] RFCs accepted journal articles

Joe Touch touch at isi.edu
Thu May 2 17:31:16 PDT 2013

On 5/2/2013 5:11 PM, Jari Arkko wrote:
>> IETF-stream and IRTF-streams are often considered peer-reviewed.
>> Other streams may or may not be considered peer-reviewed (I would not consider IAB documents as such), but independent submissions are generally not (they only purpose of the one review they get is to make sure they're on-topic and not bogus).
> There are two review steps for the independent submissions, the ISR
> and the IESG review. I was under the impression that while the latter is
> just about non-conflict with the IETF process, the former would have
> looked at content and worthwhileness to publish. But I've never been a
> part of the review board, so I don't really know…

The information is here: http://www.rfc-editor.org/indsubs.html

ISR checks to make sure a doc is non-bogus and relevant to be an RFC.

IESG is a check on whether the doc should be part of the IETF process, 
or is somehow dangerous to the Internet in content.

But neither is a true content quality review as would be expected of a 
peer-review process.

> Anyway, not trying to deflect your main point but just wondering about this one detail.
> Also, IAB does publish documents with a comment period, but it is
> true that they are not obliged to take feedback into account, so in
> theory they are not peer reviewed while in practice they often are.

Any of us can solicit feedback and use that to make our documents better.

The IAB as a group decides what to publish and whether to incorporate 
comments, according to RFC 4845. That's self-publication, not peer review.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list