ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: path forward with RFC 3932bis

2009-09-21 12:57:45


--On Monday, September 21, 2009 11:56 +0300 Jari Arkko
<jari(_dot_)arkko(_at_)piuha(_dot_)net> wrote:

Brian,

I think my comment still applies - it should be the IESG that
appeals against the Editor's final decision, not the other
way round.
  

Ok. I have no problem placing the burden on initiating the
formal dispute resolution from the IESG side instead. For
instance, if the current text says

"If dialogue fails to resolve IRSG or RFC Editor concerns with
the content of a particular IESG note, then they can take the
matter to the IAB for a final ruling."

to

"If dialogue fails to resolve IRSG or RFC Editor concerns with
the content of a particular IESG note, the IESG can take the
matter to the IAB for a final ruling."

Would this help resolve your concerns?

It would certainly help resolve some of mine.

    john



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

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