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

[Lakshminath Dondeti <[e-mail]>]

Hi David,

Thank you for sharing this information.  Now that the community knows 
this, perhaps this will be an option when there are snags in the process 
in future.

regards,
Lakshminath

On 6/17/2008 6:02 AM, David Kessens wrote:
> Lakshminath,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 11:01:17PM -0700, Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
>> I have also been disappointed by the IESG not once invoking the override 
>> procedures even when a DISCUSS is clearly inappropriate.
> 
> For the record, during my time in the IESG, we have had at least two
> cases where override procedures were requested. One vote was requested
> by me to clear a document that I was the shepherd for that got stuck
> in the IESG for a very long period and where the DISCUSSing AD was not
> responsive while trying to resolve a DISCUSS.
> 
> In another case, I asked the shepherding AD to request an override vote
> as I had fundamental issues with a document that was not likely to be
> resolved in a timely matter due to the nature of my problems with the
> document. Therefore, instead of me holding a DISCUSS forever and
> leaving the document in limbo, I proposed that an override vote could
> help us to force a decision early.
> 
> If my memory serves me correctly, we didn't have to do a formal
> override vote in both cases as the request of an override vote was
> enough to get the first case moving, while in the second case I
> decided that an informal strawpoll was enough to decide that I didn't
> have enough support for my opinion so I switched to an ABSTAIN.
> 
> David Kessens
> ---
> 
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf