Re: path forward with RFC 3932bis

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko at piuha.net>]

Brian,

> I think my comment still applies - it should be the IESG that appeals
> against the Editor's final decision, not the other way round.
>   

Ok. I have no problem placing the burden on initiating the formal 
dispute resolution from the IESG side instead. For instance, if the 
current text says

"If dialogue fails to resolve IRSG or RFC Editor concerns with the 
content of a particular IESG note, then they can take the matter to the 
IAB for a final ruling."

to

"If dialogue fails to resolve IRSG or RFC Editor concerns with the 
content of a particular IESG note, the IESG can take the matter to the 
IAB for a final ruling."

Would this help resolve your concerns?

Jari