Pete Resnick wrote:
[6.5.3]
| 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.
[...]
Appeals of this sort should not be brought to the IESG (or the IAB).
I suggest that the IESG and the IAB always decline to decide such
issues in the future should similar appeals come up.
The question then shifts from "is there a problem with 'this'
(whatever, here 3683) document" to "is there a general problem
with the standards process up to and including the IAB appeal".
Refusing to address such issues could be interpreted as some
kind of evidence by the claimant. Better they try it even if
they get it wrong - after all this is IMO about an "attempt to
enforce netiquette" on two mailing lists, not a "human rights"
question for the UN.
Frank
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf