IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Gendispatch] Re: New Version Notification for draft-eggert-appeal-support-01.txt

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Wed, 22 July 2026 12:19 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: gendispatch@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A9EE11C3D07B for <gendispatch@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 05:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1784722767; bh=o84qMVI5Ww8zmn2WG+IWqa/aJTVO1S+Ary83MTZHF+w=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=LjRH+NnrFyJxS7v0Uv4iX0b98Md0eHoxqFF1o+6Dg3NvR+2gGnnMMJT//mwKzC8PZ bjPzkeC2ojmE2v3XOVBiC7Y22a78P/BJBcs9BgbzqFkU9sRT+NbNJhXS93AQI1jjOU Sy6GHLQsGp6+PWFTT1BlzVu5Ptjvv/JCck5ihaGc=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3LKEFviYyBAL for <gendispatch@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 05:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [89.167.44.90]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E21711C3D073 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 05:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Mailerdaemon) with ESMTPSA id 095C05E38B; Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:19:24 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1784722765; h=from:subject:date:message-id:to:cc:mime-version:content-type: in-reply-to:references; bh=TEcDB7C8wbMOltHZjQq2Bn6Pj7HK3t6i+mbrgsJuH7o=; b=KLwtUVCseFsarC7A3D5L4kxSrt1MLE24NwUCcc9lX7JZ9/2W7z46/+s2lRCGRUfHAFRz8i c11AK6H+zqtPAvMIa/TYl+1qMLBD3+FQtOMOTZh5ZVobFYl1N4Vr1tjE07mLdgOqu9OK+Y o14zlj+QvulGZ3PjdX2BoDZcAYZ2S2PNq6cAKAo/W3QEBZIKQ75QSajTIgiWo2kqkGowoC SOLWUljAEDnztct0hI327d4bdv9rJmT6zFQDepyYz3ALu4xUCAOqFOiOsySABKtHC4gzds CLwb2RvbHLuK4NRYAQ000+xsUzhZgtE8nISL9j+SBxk1NA2ricBMXqkOHsL5cg==
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_EE7D0579-0CF3-49A6-A691-D83791671B2B"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.600.51.1.1\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <D9753686-8282-4F29-820A-60DD1267E9E7@eggert.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:19:14 +0200
Message-Id: <29246A5E-984E-4247-B4A0-2AD9533421BF@eggert.org>
References: <178453331540.194488.8116031580592866128@dt-datatracker-d4d6ff9d9-ql5mb> <7CFE9ED0-A217-4A2E-BBEB-A4561CDCD374@eggert.org> <CAPeSryo0pjW7n65=w1Xmq0QWLnuzHkHvHayWCyoWc1EXN-xcUQ@mail.gmail.com> <3B83B47D-2230-4B43-94D4-9EEAF46EAC1E@eggert.org> <b501132b-fa32-40ca-81ba-0a084a8c3fc3@gmail.com> <CAPeSryr_Mf0ZVrVMJZW9e0VR0k-dfU3PqohtATBKB+ZtXFE1UA@mail.gmail.com> <a3aa70c5-db13-423d-8c6b-473c308404e1@gmail.com> <b90e7307-be89-485c-bfcc-5c1d2d7dc976@app.fastmail.com> <D9753686-8282-4F29-820A-60DD1267E9E7@eggert.org>
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3864.600.51.1.1)
X-Last-TLS-Session-Version: TLSv1.2
Message-ID-Hash: XXJHBDNNLDBTTNJPIKUZHHGPV3Q33MFP
X-Message-ID-Hash: XXJHBDNNLDBTTNJPIKUZHHGPV3Q33MFP
X-MailFrom: lars@eggert.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>, Felix Linker <linkerfelix@gmail.com>, gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Gendispatch] Re: New Version Notification for draft-eggert-appeal-support-01.txt
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/B1qsISBifqxAhpNkMznNVvWJXXU>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:gendispatch-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gendispatch-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gendispatch-leave@ietf.org>


> On Jul 22, 2026, at 14:18, Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Jul 22, 2026, at 10:46, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote
>> I like this draft.  I find myself agreeing with Felix and Brian: this could be a guideline.  The appeal-handling body might be given discretion in rejecting appeals from repeat endorsers (the appellant should not be included in the set for this purpose, because they are not necessarily NomCom-elligible).
> 
> I think the current TLS appeals show that the leadership questions are very (overly?) adverse to

leadership bodies

> rejecting vexatious appeals, even when they (already) may.
> 
> I would like to make it so they need not even make a decision to not consider an appeal, rather than continuing to require them to make this an active choice. The difference may be small, but it is IMO critical.
> 
> Thanks,
> Lars
>

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status