Edits -- Re: IESG's Review of EMSD Specification

[Mohsen BANAN <mohsen@neda.com>]

XTo: iesg@ISI.EDU,
XCc: Bob Braden <braden@ISI.EDU>,
    jkrey@ISI.EDU,
    rfc-ed@ISI.EDU,
	records@neda.com
Subject: Re: IESG's Review of EMSD Specification 
In-Reply-To: <199901221533.KAA26856@spot.cs.utk.edu>
References: <199901220739.XAA11085@rostam.neda.com>
	<199901221533.KAA26856@spot.cs.utk.edu>
FCC: /home/rostam/mohsen/VM/outgoing

The IESG,

By now, the IESG has had more than *15 weeks*
to review the EMSD specification.

More than a month ago, on January 9, 1999,
the RFC Editor notified you of their approval
for publication of EMSD as an Informational
RFC and requested for the IESG paragraph.

The two week timeout for draft-rfced-info-banan-01.txt
expired on February 9, 1999.

  RFC-Editor> This RFC-to-be was submitted to the RFC Editor to be published as
  RFC-Editor> Informational: draft-rfced-info-banan-01.txt

  RFC-Editor> Two week timeout is initiated (9 February 1999).


As you know, from my perspective, the IESG
delays have been excessive and unreasonable.

In response to my previous message with the
same subject,

>>>>> On Fri, 22 Jan 1999 10:33:39 -0500, Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> said:

  Keith> The first draft of the IESG note has been circulated to the IESG.
  Keith> Various IESG members have commented on it.  The next draft will not
  Keith> be done until early next week.  IESG is having a meeting next 
  Keith> Thursday, and the EMSD note will likely be discussed at that 
  Keith> meeting.  It remains to be seen whether IESG will approve that 
  Keith> note or whether it will require another round of edits. 

Since the RFC Editor has already approved
the publication of EMSD Informational RFC we
are just waiting for an IESG note with a
specific and clear scope and purpose.
However, as far as I know, nearly 3 weeks
after that message, the "IESG note" to be
included with the EMSD Informational RFC has
not been produced yet.


At this point, no further delays are
acceptable or justifiable.


After all that we have gone through in the
case of this Informational RFC, at this
point, the IESG has the RESPONSIBILITY of 
doing its part towards the publication of 
this NON IETF, NON STANDARDS TRACK, 
Informational RFC in a timely manner.

In this case, what the IESG has done (and 
is continuing to do) amounts to CENSORSHIP
of competition.

As early as a Nov. 7, 1998 in a message to 
Keith Moore, I said.

  Mohsen> Don't abuse your authority. 

  Mohsen> Don't delay the publication of EMSD as an Informational RFC.


Yet, in practice that is exactly what 
appears to have happened.


I understand that the IESG is a group of
volunteers that finds itself accountable to
no one and that it has publicly stated that
review of non IETF work is not a high
priority for the IESG.

However, the IESG is also under the
obligation of fulfilling the *timely*
requirement of RFC 2026. Clearly, *15 weeks*
is not timely.

No additional delays are acceptable.

Even as volunteers, you have your DUTIES and
your RESPONSIBILITIES.

At this point, the IESG simply need to
complete the "IESG note" and send it to the
RFC-Editor so that it can be included in the
EMSD Informational RFC when it gets
published.

The IESG should consider this work item
urgent and important. Anything short of that
amounts to negligence and irresponsibility.


If the "IESG Note" is not complete by
February 15th, I'll request from the RFC
Editor that the EMSD Informational RFC be
published without the note.


After all,

- What is the RFC Editor expected to do when the IESG does not
  review the document in a reasonable period of time?

Which is the same question that I asked
nearly two years ago in the case of RFC-2188.

In that case, IESG caused a *7 months* delay.


As I have repeatedly said before, I have the
simple goal of completing the publication of
EMSD as an Informational RFC as soon as
possible. I much prefer not to have to adopt
a disrespectful tone with IESG.


Now that after extensive deliberations the
RFC Editor has concluded that EMSD should be
published, let's work together and complete
its publication and move on.


Please complete and send to the RFC Editor
the IESG Note to be included with this
Informational RFC when it gets published
soon. The purpose and scope of that note is
well defined in RFC 2026.


Please, let's work together. That way we can
save a lot of time and energy.


Respectfully Yours,


...Mohsen

---
  Parallel experimentation is the hallmark
  of the Internet.          -- Vinton Cerf