{# bs5ok #} {% extends "base.html" %} {# Copyright The IETF Trust 2015, All Rights Reserved #} {% load origin %} {% load ietf_filters %} {% block pagehead %}{% endblock %} {% block title %}IESG agenda: {{ date }}{% endblock %} {% block content %} {% origin %}

IESG agenda
{{ date }}

{% include "iesg/nav.html" with active="agenda" %} {% for num, section in sections %} {% if num|sectionlevel == 1 %}

{{ num }}. {{ section.title|safe }}

{% elif num|sectionlevel == 2 %}

{{ num }} {{ section.title|safe }}

{% elif num|sectionlevel == 3 %}

{{ num }} {{ section.title|safe }}

{% endif %} {% if num == "1.4" %}
{{ section.text }}
{% endif %} {% if num >= "2" and num < "5" %} {% if num == "2" %}

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable basis on which to build the salient part of the Internet infrastructure? If not, what changes would make it so?"

{% endif %} {% if num == "3.1" or num == "3.2" %}

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Is this document a reasonable contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If not, what changes would make it so?"

{% endif %} {% if num == "3.3" %}

Reviews should focus on these questions: "Are the proposed changes to document status appropriate? Have all requirements for such a change been met? If not, what changes to the proposal would make it appropriate?"

{% endif %} {% if num == "3.4" %}

The IESG will use RFC 5742 responses:

  1. The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document and IETF work;
  2. The IESG has concluded that this work is related to IETF work done in WG <X>, but this relationship does not prevent publishing;
  3. The IESG has concluded that publication could potentially disrupt the IETF work done in WG <X> and recommends not publishing the document at this time;
  4. The IESG has concluded that this document violates IETF procedures for <Y> and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval; or
  5. The IESG has concluded that this document extends an IETF protocol in a way that requires IETF review and should therefore not be published without IETF review and IESG approval.

The document shepherd must propose one of these responses in the conflict-review document, and the document shepherd may supply text for an IESG Note in that document. The Area Director ballot positions indicate consensus with the response proposed by the document shepherd and agreement that the IESG should request inclusion of the IESG Note.

Other matters may be recorded in comments, and the comments will be passed on to the RFC Editor as community review of the document.

{% endif %} {% if "docs" in section %} {% for doc in section.docs %} {% if doc.type_id == "draft" or doc.type_id == "statchg" %} {% include "iesg/agenda_doc.html" %} {% endif %} {% if doc.type_id == "conflrev" %} {% include "iesg/agenda_conflict_doc.html" %} {% endif %} {% if doc.type_id == "charter" %} {% include "iesg/agenda_charter.html" %} {% endif %} {% empty %}

(None)

{% endfor %} {% endif %} {% endif %} {% if num|startswith:"6." and user|has_role:"Area Director,IAB Chair,Secretariat" %}
{{ section.text|wordwrap:"80" }}
{% endif %} {% endfor %} {% endblock %} {% block js %}{% endblock %}