Re: Publication of EMSD as an Informational RFC

[Mohsen BANAN <mohsen@neda.com>]

>>>>> On Fri, 18 Dec 1998 13:10:30 +0000, Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com> said:

  Brian> Hi,
  Brian> As you know, the IESG has serious doubts whether this document is
  Brian> suitable for RFC publication, and the RFC Editor has chosen to
  Brian> consult the IESG in this matter. There it stands for the moment.

>From the very beginning, I requested that the RFC
Editor CC me on all the communications with the IESG
related to this spec and the RFC Editor agreed to do
so. So, I assume that by:

  Brian> ... the RFC Editor has chosen to consult the IESG in this matter.

you are talking about the email dated Nov 3, 1998 
  Message-Id: <199811031947.LAA25704@jet.isi.edu>
which was a standard  referral to IESG with a timeout of 
(17 November 1998).

According to RFC 2026 the purpose and scope of that
referral is for the IESG to identify and express any
conflicts with its current or near term work.


With respect to:

  Brian> As you know, the IESG has serious doubts ...

As far as I have seen what you consider serious doubts
amounts to unsubstantiated OPINIONS from one iesg
member who clearly suffers from a severe case of "Not
Invented Here" syndrome.

To the extent possible for the RFC Editor's information
I have responded to those opinions.

Further, those very same comments indicated that EMSD
addresses a very valid problem area which the IESG also
wishes to work on.

That in and of itself creates a "conflict of interest"
problem for the delays that the IESG has caused in the
publication of EMSD.  Clearly, the RFC Editor has had
every opportunity in the past 8 weeks to take charge
and move the publication forward.


  Brian> I would also like to point out that there is *no* automatic right
  Brian> to RFC publication. 

I have never claimed an automatic right to RFC
publication.

What gave you that impression?

Because of what happened with the publication of
RFC-2188 (lower layers of EMSD), from the very
beginning I have been insisting:
 
  "Let's do this one by the book".

That is the only right that I claim.

The book is RFC 2026 Sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3.

The book says:

    - The publication will be in a timely manner.
    - The RFC editor is in charge -- not the IESG.
    - The purpose and scope of the IESG referral is
      well defined and limited.
    - The IESG's response to the referral will be in
      a reasonable time frame.

Eight weeks have gone by since I initially submitted
EMSD spec for timely publication.

Based on what you and others have said and done, it
appears that you only wish to pay lip service to RFC
2026 and instead want to do as you please.  There is a
word for that ...

Further, it appears that the RFC Editor has been
reduced to an observing clerk.

  Brian>   Brian Carpenter
  Brian>   IAB Chair

Numerous times in the past I have offered the RFC
Editor to address any concerns she/he/they may have
with respect to suitability of publication of EMSD.

Again, I respectfully request that the RFC Editor
published EMSD as an Informational RFC based on the RFC
Editor's independent judgement.

Regards,

Mohsen Banan.