Re: [spring] Resignation request

["Scott O. Bradner" <[e-mail]>]

I have no information about the situation but I do not understand why an AD would be declaring consensus in any case - 
that is normally the responsibility of WG chairs.  see RFC 2418 section 3.3 

Scott

> On Mar 2, 2020, at 4:30 PM, Sander Steffann <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Ted,
> 
>> Without any comment on this particular instance, it is generally a good idea to go through an appeal of a specific decision first. My experience is that people do reconsider their actions in the light of appeals fairly frequently, and it is generally better to explore the option of reconsideration before anything else.  If there are still concerns after that, you can always test the waters for further actions (such as a recall, which is set out in https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7437#section-7 and  https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8713#section-7).
> 
> I hope that email that was all that is necessary. I dislike official procedures against people when not necessary. People make mistakes, and should (must) be given the opportunity to solve them. In this case I feel that part of that solution is a voluntary resignation, but I'm open to alternatives.
> 
>> Having made many of my own mistakes over the course of my time in the IETF, I know I have appreciated the opportunity to get something right (or explain more fully my reasoning.)  I understand that there are other efforts at drafting a summary of issues in the general space, but a short, focused appeal of the nature "I ask for a reconsideration of a declaration of consensus, given the amount of time the most recent draft was available before its declaration" might prove useful.
> 
> If that was the only thing I object to… Unfortunately I cannot believe an AD can be oblivious of the controversy, and I have seen several attempts to solve the open issues. I am just baffled that consensus can be declared while these attempts are still ongoing.
> 
> Let's see what happens now before deciding what to do next.
> 
> Thank you for your advice.
> 
> Cheers,
> Sander
>