ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: bcp-02: Section 3.4

2004-12-12 13:43:59
I've been thinknig more about the issue of the appeal process.  Here
are some of the questions I have considered and the answers I've
found.  First, can I provide something I'd like better than the
current text?  The obvious candidate is the text in
draft-ietf-iasa-bcp-00.  This would be problematic for two reasons.
First, I don't think we could get a consensus in support of that text.
Second, several people pointed out a real potential for abuse of that
process.  The concern that the IASA would not be able to do its job
because of various appeals is serious.  Harald also pointed out that
designing appeals processes are hard; we should not do so if we can
avoid it.  I do not believe I'm capable of designing a process that is
not subject to abuse and that meets my concerns in the time available.

Is the appeals process in iasa-bcp-02 a regression over the status
quo?  Currently there is no formal process for the IETF to appeal a
decision of the secretary.  In practice CNRI responds to concerns
raised by the IETF chair.  I'm aware of nothing that requires them to
do so.  As such, this process does not appear to be a regression.  An
important side note is that without an appeals process we seem to be
doing moderately OK; it is likely that this process will not often be
used.

Do we have recourse if we find the appeals process in the BCP is
inadequate?  As others have pointed out we do have the option of a
recall of some or all IAOC members.  If that were all the choice we
had, I would consider the current text unacceptable.  However we also
have the option of creating or revising a new appeals procedure.  I'd
hate to find ourselves in the position of doing that in response to a
specific issue, but it is an option we have and an option appropriate
to use if circumstances justify its use.  Relying on this option is
dangerous: if we feel that we are not in a position to design an
appeal process now, how will we feel when faced with the urgency and
division of a pressing process failure?


In conclusion, I do not like the current text.  However it seems like
the best option available in the time we have.  It is something I can
live with.

--Sam


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>