Re: Appeal against IESG blocking DISCUSS on draft-klensin-rfc2821bis

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

Dave:

>>>If you feel that group was rogue, please explain.  If you do not, 
>>>what is the basis for your view that its considerations were 
>>>sufficiently faulty to warrant being overridden?
>>Prior to the appeal, this aspect of John's rationale was not 
>>raised.  It was not raised by John, the document PROTO shepherd, or 
>>the IESG member sponsoring the document.
>
>Again, I hope we do not find ourselves in a he said/no he didn't 
>exchange.  I'll
>merely suggest that had the Discuss been immediately taken to the 
>public mailing
>list, it seems pretty likely that salient details would quickly have been put
>forward.

This is an individual submission, not a WG document.  So, there is no 
charter that lists the appropriate mail list for such a 
discussion.  That said, John did take the issue to a mail list.  I 
know this because someone forward his posting to me.  John did not CC 
me on the posting, which I interpret as not seeking dialogue at that point.

Russ 

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf