Re: [Ietf-and-github] Closing issues

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

On 02-Nov-19 18:07, Rob Sayre wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 9:51 PM Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>     > That is interesting. Has anything ever been overturned on appeal?
> 
>     For GitHub usage, I have no idea. In general:
>     https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2026#section-6.5
>     https://www.ietf.org/standards/process/appeals/
>     Appeals can be dealt with between the appellant, the WG Chairs, and the AD,
>     without invoking the formal process, and those go uncounted.
> 
> 
> Right,
> 
> I was wondering if anything had ever been overturned on appeal using this process.

Well, I've never done an analysis, but I'd say most of the formal appeals ended up with a compromise decision rather than a complete overturn, even for the ones that were further appealed to the IAB. But for appeals settled at the AD level, we have no idea because there's nowhere that they are logged.

That doesn't mean the appeal mechanism is an empty threat, though. I think it keeps everybody on their toes. Because of cases like the one you brought up, it needs to be 100% clear that decisions taken via GitHub are appealable, IMHO.

Regards
    Brian

> 
> thanks,
> Rob
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>     Regards
>        Brian
> 
>     On 02-Nov-19 15:42, Rob Sayre wrote:
>     > On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 7:22 PM Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>> wrote:
>     >
>     >     On 02-Nov-19 14:41, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>     >     > Looking at the draft, I think something that would address the issue Rob
>     >     > is raising is that the first paragraph of 4.1.2 (about closing issues)
>     >     > get an extra sentence.  Along the lines of:
>     >     >      As noted in section 2.2, this guidance MUST be communicated to and
>     >     > agreed by the working groups.
>     >
>     >     Agreed.
>     >
>     >     > One can argue that this is implicit in the document.  It seems like it
>     >     > could help clarity and can't hurt.
>     >
>     >     It's already clear in the document that normal IETF process rules
>     >     apply, i.e. RFC2418 etc. That certainly implies quite a lot, including
>     >     of course that contested decisions are appealable.
>     >
>     >
>     > That is interesting. Has anything ever been overturned on appeal?
>     >
>     > It would be good to record such an occurrence in future documents.
>     >
>     > thanks,
>     > Rob
>     >   
>