IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gendispatch] New Version Notification - draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04.txt

Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 11 September 2021 07:38 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E15F73A130F; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:38:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NIDF5L5jMjWY; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:38:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC90F3A1314; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id h1so7089615ljl.9; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:38:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=d6HyW62nOdqB1mCPoF4JvdM9LQZUWCfzSMNWG/MUDJw=; b=hOz16SFKC18X60IaPloVkQp4sEmrL/FSav3mkpZ2lFS6cecBzzOAMcATExERmrxbTA c8GvzTpVS3mAGuJGruHrKTQLKTNhgfrStB1c+we5c50bSRIdB8Bxtcr2UFYekv7bGzSP 4NWl2fvnTAJqDJNE06+haQ5EAXnSpDZy5C0RakMQyS9NzVcfxq5MO7YPl7vDi045eCmC lcPgVUF8ZCqgQ3TV9kzZjn7l429ckuTNGr6gbT9nXpfDM44Mb2bLb7G1Wp0965KfIKHE XzeKXQxiNlXr0aJdm7Hi/u8yFjaOFJL+AbBgXIP79z+b/4TaxEBR2hA7yN1FAoUcqvP8 2SSQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=d6HyW62nOdqB1mCPoF4JvdM9LQZUWCfzSMNWG/MUDJw=; b=f17K2pzTyIahK+AAtO4f9Q4x7rneU02IqxzTU/Vbnrz3p8Zs0Xioey5hwsRwS4dtFa Qr08u4znh6z1tu4n8x3Qi2CgouTImaqzmT3XefsTv7E3smQfZJvEbDFuUDCOJ+OwF/YE ZgiOZrY6+HalSpRheM/SHIEqc3m7+NhTTadjD64wEyOKenD/ZdSV4aIBxxUa9RKDUWYL CaAcRFlQTk9J4+EvMvEAA/ZWRUnbauG7Fbx+uGcdWox02GAhcQ9ezuxG5JnsVoyFxIHI roTEXKV8mRyBnCs5/DtTu66PLBTA3SWacWVvtFNYke9A85JuhRS0aLUdl1elwig7LYg+ XW9Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5315XQaP/zxUKkm7dmd5lOUrvy3TAx1Ik7GNfM2uvNQRECgA8U8Y jwYa49BUSsd0eOUdVH8LDGuA/tU9u7hW2Vl2lrE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwol6XmK43NBMoGcMM5m/EBtUTlPI9lfJU3fTYqGuQrL1fDFugPQ6Hh/GC20iGkfNdvQuKybG8A3uo+/u5wOoc=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:910f:: with SMTP id m15mr1253420ljg.275.1631345873282; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 00:37:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <0a918f8f-b2bd-4756-b0f5-23ff8063f1e8@gmail.com> <B45896C1-F9F1-44F6-9BF7-8AF9B573233C@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <B45896C1-F9F1-44F6-9BF7-8AF9B573233C@eggert.org>
From: Brian Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 19:37:42 +1200
Message-ID: <CANMZLAbubQckiU8GCdYLaVbfSPmDsRuURQY-LEw1JTvxxfbjZQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Cc: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, GENDISPATCH List <gendispatch@ietf.org>, draft-eggert-bcp45bis.all@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000048698305cbb34f7f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/3EdkKRN_5OcebBFdynhd_2SaJy8>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] New Version Notification - draft-eggert-bcp45bis-04.txt
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 07:38:06 -0000

Hi Lars,
Since 2026 doesn't mention conflict of interest, that's probably the
procedure. Not entirely satisfactory, but we could live with it.

Regards,
    Brian Carpenter
    (via tiny screen & keyboard)

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021, 17:37 Lars Eggert, <lars@eggert.org> wrote:

> Hi Brian,
>
> Is that an option in your reading of 2026? They way I understand it is
> that if the AD is conflicted, the entire IESG is the next step?
>
> Thanks,
> Lars
>
> --
> Sent from a mobile device; please excuse typos.
>
> > On Sep 10, 2021, at 23:20, Brian E Carpenter <
> brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10-Sep-21 23:01, Barry Leiba wrote:
> >> That works for me, Lars, and thanks.
> >>
> >> I see Brian's point about Gen AD instead of IETF Chair, but I don't
> >> agree with it here, because the SAAs are explicitly appointed by the
> >> IETF Chair, not related to the Gen Area.
> >
> > You're correct. There's still the corner case where the IETF Chair is
> > conflicted - for example, if the message(s) objected to by the SAAs
> > made allegations about the IETF Chair themself. Probably another AD
> > should be the first recourse in that case.
> >
> >   Brian
> >
> >>
> >> Barry
> >>
> >>> On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 3:11 AM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I have a proposed change to use the normal RFC2026 appeals process in
> https://github.com/larseggert/bcp45bis/pull/7/files. This is the current
> change:
> >>>
> >>> --- a/draft-eggert-bcp45bis.md
> >>> +++ b/draft-eggert-bcp45bis.md
> >>> @@ -192,8 +192,8 @@ manner.
> >>>
> >>> Because an SAA serves at the discretion of the IETF Chair - even if
> the IETF
> >>> Chair is not otherwise involved in the operation of the SAA team - any
> SAA
> >>> -decision could be appealed to the IAB. The IAB shall then review the
> situation
> >>> -and attempt to resolve it in a manner of its own choosing.
> >>> +decision can be appealed to the IETF Chair, per {{!RFC2026}}.
> Decisions by the
> >>> +IETF Chair can be appealed to the IESG as whole, again per
> {{!RFC2026}}.
> >>>
> >>> # Security Considerations
> >>>
> >>> Please let me know if this expresses what is desired?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Lars
> >>>
> >
> > --
> > Gendispatch mailing list
> > Gendispatch@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email