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

I don't think it really matters.

I am not aware of any successful appeal ever, so write whatever seems
expedient,

thanks,
Rob

On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 11:51 PM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> thanks for the suggestions. Please see
> https://github.com/larseggert/bcp45bis/pull/6 for a PR that rolls those
> in.
>
> On 2021-9-8, at 23:41, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
> >   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.
> >
> > Why are we varying from the normal appeal process here?  One reason to
> > keep the IETF Chair out of the operation is exactly so the first
> > appeal *can* go to the IETF Chair, as it normally would.  Then to the
> > plenary IESG, and then to the IAB.  I don't see a good reason to
> > change that process.
>
> This was also brought up by Rob during his AD review. This text is based
> on the current text in BCP45, which says:
>
>    The IETF Chair, the IETF Executive Director, or a sergeant-at-arms
>    appointed by the Chair is empowered to restrict posting by a person,
>    or of a thread, when the content is inappropriate and represents a
>    pattern of abuse.  They are encouraged to take into account the
>    overall nature of the postings by an individual and whether
>    particular postings are an aberration or typical.  Complaints
>                                                       ^^^^^^^^^^
>    regarding their decisions should be referred to the IAB.
>    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> I assumed that "complaints" were supposed to be appeals, because otherwise
> it's undefined what the IAB was supposed to do with these complaints.
>
> I'm fully OK with using the regular appeals process here, but since it
> would be a change from the original BCP45 and the intent was to do a
> minimal bis, I didn't make that change.
>
> Thanks,
> Lars
>
> --
> Gendispatch mailing list
> Gendispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
>