If I may comment from my position as ex-RSE, the RFC Editor's policy for at least the past 10 years has been to fuss at authors who ask for substantive changes in AUTH48, but then to follow the dictum: "better to get it right than get it early". In other words, the RFC Editor did push back but generally did not refuse suhstantive changes in AUTH48.
Bob Braden John Klensin wrote, in part:
The one change that, IMO, might be worth making in this regard would be to explicitly empower the RFC Editor to push back, if necessary by going back to the community, if, in their judgment, substantive changes that deviate from the approved document are requested at AUTH48. My own view is that they have always had the ability to do that although I don't believe it has been exercised since the AUTH48 procedures were created. I have no opinion as to whether there are cases in which it should have been. john _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf