On what kinds of grounds should such things be appealable?
For WG decisions, there can be appeals based on technical grounds or
procedural grounds.
The ISOC however may only here pure procedural appeals.
I would hate to see someone "appeal" an IAD decision because they happened
to disagree with it. That would make the job impossible.
There probably are some things that should be subject to appeal. I don't
know what they would be. If we can not list them, I don't think we dare
create an appeal process.
The IADs job is administration. We need to hire an IAD and let him do his
job with sufficient oversight / review (that's what the IAOC is for.)
Note that if the IAD decisions are sufficiently transparent, then if the
community really dislikes the decisions, then the community leadership will
look into better directing or if necessary replacing the IAD.
I have even more trouble seeing how someone would end up appealing an IAOC
"decision" since their primary job is oversight. I presume that they will
have decisions to make over and above oversight. But "appealing" most of
those would produce very strange results.
Note that there are many things in our process that can not be
appealed. The IESG decides how many areas to have. It decides what areas
different working groups belong in. It needs to make those decisions
(usually merely by living with the status quo) in order to function.
Transparency of decisions does require appealability. Most government
transparency does not lead to appeals. There are specific legal grounds
for "adjusting" government decisions. Not "anything can be appealed".
At 08:48 AM 12/2/2004, avri(_at_)psg(_dot_)com wrote:
I tend to feel that both the decisions of the IAD and of the IAOC should
be appealable.
My thinking tends toward thinking that anyone should be able to appeal the
decision, or any practice including the accounting practices, of the
IAD. I believe we are defining high standards of transparency, as I think
we should, but transparency without recourse can be problematic.
I think anyone, or perhaps any group of people, should be able to appeal
IAD actions to the IAOC.
the chain of appeal could be either:
a. the normal iaoc-iesg-iab-isoc bot
b. iaoc - a joint iab/iesg appeals committee (that excluded iaoc members)
set up to hear the appeal - isoc bot
c. an abbreviated chain iaoc-isoc bot
As for the IAOC, I believe their actions should be appealable as well and
should use the same chain as an IAD appeal.
a.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf