Thomas Narten wrote:
> If the above text were in effect today, would it be sufficient to
> cover the situation at issue here? (Now would be an excellent time
> to consider updates/clarifications to the above text.)
I don't think so. The text allows IESG to override the allocation
procedures when they judge there is "strong IETF consensus" to do
In the situation at issue here: IMHO the main question is whether
we have rough consensus that this particular draft should be
published as non-Standards Track RFC.
If the IESG thinks we have this consensus, they would just approve
the document, and the override procedure would not be needed. If
the IESG thinks there is no consensus (or it's too rough), the
override rule wouldn't apply.
So while I think the override rule might be valuable in some
cases, it doesn't seem to help here.
Ietf mailing list