As this is documenting an existing algorithm that was not developed in the IETF, we have no control over the substance of the document, so I am not commenting on that: it is what it is.

And that's exactly my issue with this: it's in the wrong stream.  The shepherd writeup says that it was not developed in the IETF and there's no reason to put it on Standards Track, but also says that there's no reason it "needs to go to the ISE".  I disagree: this is *exactly* the sort of document that the Independent stream is there for.  There is no meaningful sense of IETF consensus on this -- all we can have is consensus to publish it as is.

Ultimately, the IESG, not my review, will decide the right answer here.  Please consider asking the ISE to move this to the Independent stream, where I think it should have been taken in the first place.  Thanks.