Your Appeal to me regarding replacing IPSEC WG Chair(s)

["Jeffrey I. Schiller" <[e-mail]>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Monday, March 18, 1996

Bill:
        I have considered your request to remove the chairs of the
IPSEC Working Group. I have taken this matter seriously and have
consulted with many people about what they believe is happening in the
Working Group. I have also been attending most of the face to face
meetings myself and read the mailing list, so I have my own
observations as well.

My Findings:

o Chairing the IPSEC Working Group is a difficult job. There are
  competing proposals, differing views of the requirements (mostly in
  terms of how important various requirements are), and investment made
  by proposal submitters.

o You have in the past made significant technical contributions to the
  IPsec standards.  Your technical abilities are considerable when you
  choose to use them and you are always an active participant.

o Your behavior in the working group has been less than professional.
  You tend to dominate any discussion that interests you. You do not
  respect the prerogative of the chair(s) to facilitate the working
  group.

o Your behavior causes many people to become intimidated and unwilling
  to contribute their ideas when you are present. You tend to dominate
  any discussion that interests you so that other people's useful
  technical inputs are drowned out or otherwise impeded.

Other:

        I have also had people report to me that you have threatened
them with lawsuits and otherwise used intimidation tactics when other
avenues of argument were not available to you. Furthermore I interpret
your message to the Working Group on 3/14/96 as an attempt to
intimidate the chairs and Working Group by making your appeal to me
public and threatening to continue to appeal until some body finds in
your favor.

        Remember the motto: "Rough consensus and running code." Rough
consensus does not mean a consensus that Bill Simpson will always
agree with. By threatening appeals, lawsuits and by just plain
shouting people down, you are not participating in a consensus
process. You are in violation of the Spirit of the IETF process, in my
opinion.

Therefore I Conclude:

        I can find no reason to believe that the Working Group Chairs
should be removed on the basis of your appeal. In fact I have
discovered that the Working Group chairs have often gone out of their
way to ensure that they were as fair as possible to you and your
proposals.

        Furthermore I agree with the Working Group chairs that your
behavior has been unacceptable. I interpret Paul's use of the word
"fire" to convey to the Working Group members that you have no special
status in the working group and members do not have to pay any
particular attention to you.

        I would go so far as to add that as long as your behavior
continues to be unacceptable, members of the working group should feel
free to ignore you, consensus can well be reached without you.

        I am sorry that it had to come to this. I believe that you
have a strong technical background and good insights. However your
talent is wasted if you cannot work and communicate in a civilized
manner.

        At this point you have two choices. You can either appeal my
decision to the IESG if you so choose or you can alter your behavior
and become a contributing productive member of the IPSEC working group
and the IETF as a whole. The choice is yours.

                                -Jeff Schiller
                                Area Director for Security
                                Internet Engineering Steering Group
                                Internet Engineering Task Force

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMU4/88UtR20Nv5BtAQGsDQP/YeWGDQLcNnNGSQRyaxGei2yf6XA5pBGz
up7asMKORhbYtM+cQTvF07RbCKslZc9pcUwH9E4i0O4CnY4m3OFx9uvI4rKwcIP1
Csb22Lkd2BwnbV7+732vkkFA4lNHuiDML1NCU5lQaBH43iXXmJklFLpjF1AMsHpc
gbJnFc2bbtY=
=Owey
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----