Re: Petition to the IESG for a PR-action [....]

[Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>]

Julien.Maisonneuve at alcatel.com wrote:

> (this should not go on ietf at ietf, but for lack of a better
> list... please disregard if it bothers you)

[...]

> Banning should be exceptional.

So far 3683 was never used (please correct me if I'm wrong).

> Now we are presented with two dubious (read non obvious,
> possibly requiring very careful inspection to arrive
> to a conclusion) cases in the space of a few days

Very different at the moment:  Only an AD can start (or
prepare to start) a "PR action".  That might be what we've
seen in the first case.

This second case is still at the "convince an AD to support
to start a PR action" stage.  It's a private petition of
Harald (he's affected as listmom of the tag review list, so
unlike most others he's not free to use his killfile there).

> it appears that the process itself is hardly symmetrical
> and lacks clear consensus safeguards.

That would come later in the "last call".  At the moment the
second case is a private list of signatures, same idea as e.g.
<http://old.openspf.org/cgi-bin/openspf_pledge.cgi> - but of
course the signatures of several (former) IETF Chairs, ADs,
WG co-Chairs, Unicode Chair, TAO author, etc. might impress
the poor active AD(s) who finally get(s) this list...

> In a balanced world, this would spell doom for RFC3683.

...so far it's like an unpublished I-D.  If you don't agree
with it you could ignore it until the potential "last call".

                         Bye, Frank



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf