ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Second Last Call: <draft-ietf-sieve-notify-sip-message-08.txt> (Sieve Notification Mechanism: SIP MESSAGE) to Proposed Standard

2012-01-26 15:26:18
At 11:39 26-01-2012, Pete Resnick wrote:
Just in case others are having similar thoughts:

The IESG and IAB are *not* the ones that get to make the decision about what ought to be done here. The community needs to come to a consensus about the right outcome and the leadership folks will judge that consensus and instantiate whatever actions need to be taken. It's certainly OK if you feel you don't have enough information yet to decide what

I suggest not accepting any Internet-Draft submission until a decision has been taken. It is left to the Working Group Chair to take action if there is any attempt to circumvent that.

I suggest that the IESG does not process any Internet-Drafts until a decision has been taken.

the appropriate action is, but if you're a member of this community, it is your responsibility to contribute to the decision in the end. You may decide that the conversation on the list has concluded the way you like; you're not required to post just to say that you agree. But don't expect the leadership to make this decision for you. We will give guidance as needed, but it's your decision.

I have not seen any feedback from IETF participants affiliated with Huawei. I'll highlight a comment made by John Klensin:

  (5) Unless the clarification suggested in (2) can be provided,
   each IETF participant who is associated with the relevant
   company and who is in an IETF-related leadership or
   decision-making position (WG Chairs; Editors; IESG, IAB, IAOC,
   Nomcom, members; etc.) should be asked to make a conscientious
   personal review as to whether this type of action sufficiently
   compromises his or her position that resignation or some other
   action would be appropriate and, as appropriate, to review IETF
   policies with whatever management chains are relevant.  I am
   _not_ suggesting that anyone be asked to resign, only that they
   engage in careful consideration of the issues and their
   implications."

There is an IAB member with an Huawei affiliation.

There is an IESG member with an Huawei affiliation.

There are two NomCom members with an Huawei affiliation.

Individuals with an Huawei affiliation are participating in multimob, paws, cdni, hybi, pce, armd, ccamp, csi, dhc, 6man, dnsext, v6ops, softwire, 6renum, xrblock, ospf, pcp, roll, opsawg, core, mpls, trill, pcn, bmwg, bfd, idr, pwe3, ppsp, decade, p2psip, dime, sieve, isis, avtcore, netext, 6lowpan, radext, l3vpn, l2vpn, ancp, ipsecme, mmusic, tictoc, grow, behave, forces, mboned, mif, geopriv, vcarddav, hokey, kitten, abfab, emu, karp, avtext and alto.

And a comment from Dave Crocker:

  "Somehow, an apology does not seem sufficient.  Something more
   substantial is warranted."

I agree with Dave that something more substantial is warranted. Could these individuals share their thoughts about what action would be appropriate?

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

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