--On torsdag, januar 13, 2005 08:13:26 -0500 Scott Bradner
<sob(_at_)harvard(_dot_)edu> wrote:
harald proposes:
3.5 Decision review
In the case where someone questions a decision of the IAD or the
IAOC, he or she may ask for a formal review of the decision.
The request for review is addressed to the person or body that made
the decision. It is up to that body to decide to make a response,
and on the form of a response.
The IAD is required to respond to requests for a review from the
IAOC, and the IAOC is required to respond to requests for a review
of a decision from the IAB or from the IESG.
If members of the community feel that they are unjustly denied a
response to a request for review, they may ask the IAB or the IESG
to make the request on their behalf.
Answered requests for review and their responses are made public.
I am still worried about the possibility of a DoS attack
on which unit?
As I said in the note - IAOC and IAD can /dev/null the people who try DoS
attacks. And the IESG and IAB can act as DoS attack filters, if required.
(If the IESG decides to DoS the IAOC, we have larger issues...)
and the messy
situation where the looser in a bid wants the bid award overturned so
would be happier with some language that says that its real hard
or impossible to overturn signed contracts
That's why the whole section talks about "review", not "restart", "nullify"
or "change" - I think that's adequately addressed.
but that said I can live with what Harald suggests if no one else
shares my worries
I think you have to explain more why you are worried before I'm able to
share them.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf