I have to agree with Joel - but from a different angle. The "normal process" seems to be that - once an ID is approved at the WG level by rough consensus - it goes to the IESG and then to the IETF as a whole.
If (for some reason) it does not gain rough consensus from the IETF as a whole (and this seems to be an extreme corner case), then it could be published as an individual RFC - but should be kicked back to the WG to make this decision. If it was then published as an individual (informational or experimental) RFC - that would be effectively because it first ceased to be a WG consensus draft. This may not be obvious, but it makes more sense than assuming that the WG could cause the RFC editor to publish an ID as any kind of a WG consensus RFC without IETF concensus... -----Original Message----- From: Gen-art <gen-art-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Barry Leiba Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2019 2:34 PM To: Joel M. Halpern <j...@joelhalpern.com> Cc: IETF discussion list <i...@ietf.org>; Jiankang Yao <ya...@cnnic.cn>; draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration.all <draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration....@ietf.org>; John C Klensin <john-i...@jck.com>; General Area Review Team <gen-...@ietf.org>; regext <regext@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [regext] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-regext-bundling-registration-11 > If I think about it too much, I end up unable to parse the notion of a > document published on the IETF stream without IETF rough consensus. And yet they are there today and will continue to be. b _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list gen-...@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
