ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Appeal from Phillip Hallam-Baker on the publication of RFC 7049 on the Standards Track

2014-02-21 03:33:02
Hi Phillip,
At 13:08 20-02-2014, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
An appeal was raised. If you think that the process has to be followed or bad things will result then you should insist that the IESG address the matter in an official capacity to avoid the setting of the precedent you want to avoid.

The only way I can insist that the IESG address the matter is if I can convince one or more Area Directors that I might be able to recall [2] them if they do not address the matter.

I find it rather interesting that there has been more concern about the correct way to handle the non-handling of the appeal than there ever was about the rather minor changes to the specification I proposed that could have avoided the need for process questions at all.

The only recourse available to me in the case of an arbitrary decision [2] is the the appeal process. I might not get any help if I do not know the correct way for an appeal. If I do not know the process the only choice left to me would be to accept an arbitrary decision.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moonesamy-nomcom-eligibility-01
2. There is an informative comment at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00269.html