Re: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

[Russ Housley <housley at vigilsec.com>]

I'm sorry for the way that this discussion has gone. I joined the 
discussion in order to let the whole community see both sides of the 
disagreement.  However, in an attempt to provide clarity and correct 
inaccurate statements, the discussion turned into tit for tat.  The 
back-and-forth banter did not help any of the people that wanted to 
understand the issues or context for the disagreement.  For my part 
in that situation, I apologize.  I'll try very hard to not repeat my 
mistakes in the future.

As Chair of the IESG, I am going to do my best to find ways to reduce 
the number of late surprises.  This is in line with the goal that I 
set when I took on this position: incremental improvement to the IETF 
standards process.

The I-D Tracker and the way that IESG ballot positions are used is at 
the center of the issues raised by this appeal.  The I-D Tracker was 
built with two goals in mind.  First, it was intended to increase 
transparency.  Second, it was intended to help ADs manage the 
document review and approval process.  The first goal seems to have 
been achieved to a greater degree than I ever realized.  As a result, 
IESG members now find themselves being asked to explain processes 
that were previously invisible to the community.  As such, I think it 
is time to consider whether the IESG ballot structure needs 
revision.  The ballot was designed for ADs and the Secretariat; it 
tells whether a document is ready for approval.  Today, it appears 
that we also need a ballot that tells the document authors, WG 
chairs, and PROTO shepherds what actions are needed to move a document forward.

At this point I cannot give any explicit actions that will be taken, 
I sincerely hope that the handling of this appeal will provide 
insights for the next steps.  I think it is time to let the IESG 
process the appeal.

All the best,
  Russ

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf