Re: [IETF] Re: Appeal Response to Abdussalam Baryun regarding draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-sec-threats

Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> Wed, 03 July 2013 17:02 UTC

Return-Path: <warren@kumari.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BED7811E80F2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cjoiEiBqj0wU for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:02:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vimes.kumari.net (smtp1.kumari.net [204.194.22.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1856C11E820D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 10:02:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.153] (unknown [66.84.81.89]) by vimes.kumari.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC27B1B403E8; Wed, 3 Jul 2013 13:02:37 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.5 \(1508\))
Subject: Re: [IETF] Re: Appeal Response to Abdussalam Baryun regarding draft-ietf-manet-nhdp-sec-threats
From: Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net>
In-Reply-To: <51D45225.1000804@qti.qualcomm.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 13:02:36 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1B046143-4B0E-41C0-9F50-09A87206FCE9@kumari.net>
References: <20130702222442.2467.13086.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <290E20B455C66743BE178C5C84F12408223F494ECC@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <51D45225.1000804@qti.qualcomm.com>
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1508)
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 17:02:50 -0000

On Jul 3, 2013, at 12:32 PM, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com> wrote:

> On 7/2/13 6:37 PM, l.wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
>> Do we have any statistics on how many appeals to the IESG fail and how many succeed?
>>   
> 
> My quick read of http://www.ietf.org/iesg/appeal.html:
> 
> Accepted: 6
> Denied: 25
> Withdrawn: 1
> 
> One appellant appealed 12 times and all of the appeals were denied. One appellant appealed 4 times, all denied. One appellant appealed 3 times, all denied.
> 
> At least two of the accepted appeals resulted in a different remedy than requested by the appellant (i.e., adding an IESG Note to a document instead of making other changes or rejecting the document).
> 
> At least two of the denied appeals were on strictly procedural grounds; one came over two months after the action, one was appealing an IAB decision that was out of jurisdiction for the IESG to decide.
> 
> Interpret the above as you see fit.

Thank you -- another worthwhile thing to do is look at who all has appealed and ask yourself "Do I really want to be part of this club?"

Other than a *very* small minority of well known and well respected folk the http://www.ietf.org/iesg/appeal.html page is basically a handy kook reference.

W


> 
> pr
> 
> -- 
> Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478
> 

--
It is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a blunt axe.  It is equally vain
to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead.
    --  E.W Dijkstra, 1930-2002