Re: Last Call: draft-housley-iesg-rfc3932bis (IESG Procedures for Handling of Independent and IRTF Stream Submissions) to BCP

[Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com>]

> > RFC4846 section 5 uses the word "recommend"
> >   If the IESG, after completing its review, identifies issues, it may
> >   recommend explanatory or qualifying text for the RFC Editor to
> >   include in the document if it is published.
>
> Olaf, I believe this means in the contents of the document. I am under
> the understanding the the IESG Note in RFC is provided by the IESG not
> by the RFC Editor. Is there a document that says otherwise? (I'm
> certainly open to the possibility that perhaps these documents should
> not have an IESG note but that seems a different issue)

My understanding of this text is that the IESG can recommend text, 
including an IESG Note.  The RFC Editor can accept it or not.  The 
RFC Editor has a lot of discretion here.  To date, the RFC Editor has 
never rejected an IESG Note.

Russ