On May 31, 2006, at 9:24 AM, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
If an AD or the IESG makes a mistake, there is also an appeals
mechanism available. There isn't any documented appeals mechanism
for IAB decisions. Should there be?
Actually, there is. See section 6.5.3 of RFC 2026. As with an appeal
to the IAB, the question changes somewhat when it is invoked (an
appeal to the IESG claims a bad decision by a WG chair or an AD,
while an appeal to the IAB claims a process failure), and in point of
fact it has never been invoked. An appeal in each case reviews the
actions of a lower level, and if upheld, tells the lower level to fix
its process and then review its decision according to the revised
process; an appeal of the IAB's decision is questioning the process
documents that govern the IETF, and if upheld, directs that they be
revised according to an appropriate process.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
RFC 2026 Internet Standards Process October 1996
The IAB decision is final with respect to the question of whether or
not the Internet standards procedures have been followed and with
respect to all questions of technical merit.
6.5.2 Process Failures
This document sets forward procedures required to be followed to
ensure openness and fairness of the Internet Standards Process, and
the technical viability of the standards created. The IESG is the
principal agent of the IETF for this purpose, and it is the IESG
that
is charged with ensuring that the required procedures have been
followed, and that any necessary prerequisites to a standards action
have been met.
If an individual should disagree with an action taken by the IESG in
this process, that person should first discuss the issue with the
ISEG Chair. If the IESG Chair is unable to satisfy the complainant
then the IESG as a whole should re-examine the action taken, along
with input from the complainant, and determine whether any further
action is needed. The IESG shall issue a report on its review of
the
complaint to the IETF.
Should the complainant not be satisfied with the outcome of the IESG
review, an appeal may be lodged to the IAB. The IAB shall then
review
the situation and attempt to resolve it in a manner of its own
choosing and report to the IETF on the outcome of its review.
If circumstances warrant, the IAB may direct that an IESG
decision be
annulled, and the situation shall then be as it was before the IESG
decision was taken. The IAB may also recommend an action to the
IESG,
or make such other recommendations as it deems fit. The IAB may not,
however, pre-empt the role of the IESG by issuing a decision which
only the IESG is empowered to make.
The IAB decision is final with respect to the question of whether or
not the Internet standards procedures have been followed.
6.5.3 Questions of Applicable Procedure
Further recourse is available only in cases in which the procedures
themselves (i.e., the procedures described in this document) are
claimed to be inadequate or insufficient to the protection of the
rights of all parties in a fair and open Internet Standards Process.
Claims on this basis may be made to the Internet Society Board of
Trustees. The President of the Internet Society shall acknowledge
such an appeal within two weeks, and shall at the time of
acknowledgment advise the petitioner of the expected duration of the
Trustees' review of the appeal. The Trustees shall review the
Bradner Best Current Practice [Page 23]
^L
RFC 2026 Internet Standards Process October 1996
situation in a manner of its own choosing and report to the IETF on
the outcome of its review.
The Trustees' decision upon completion of their review shall be
final
with respect to all aspects of the dispute.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf