Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming (off-topic)

S. Moonesamy,

Please see inline

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: spring [mailto:spring-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy
> Sent: Sunday, March 1, 2020 9:36 PM
> To: Andrew Alston; ietf@ietf.org
> Cc: spring@ietf.org; Martin Vigoureux
> Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming (off-topic)
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> [Cc to ietf@]
> 
> I'll disclose that I am also affiliated with a 
> RIR.  I am copying this message to the 
> Responsible Area Director [1] for the SPRING Working Group.
> 
> At 01:17 AM 01-03-2020, Andrew Alston wrote:
> >While some on this list have made references to 
> >Bruno's integrity - let me start by saying - I 
> >make no comment on anyone's integrity - because 
> >I don't know Mr. Decraene well enough to comment 
> >on that, and because I find an individual's 
> >integrity in a discussion about if a potential 
> >conflict exists to be irrelevant. When people 
> >recuse for conflict in any normal environment, 
> >it is not because they will act on the conflict 
> >necessarily, it is because of perception, 
> >because it can taint the issue under discussion, 
> >and it leaves the process open to both attack and appeal.
> 
> My question was about the process and the role 
> with respect to 
> draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming.  I am 
> not personally acquainted with Mr. Decraene to 
> comment about his integrity.  It has been pointed 
> out to me that the person is well-known.  I don't 
> see what that has to do with the question which I asked.
> 
> There is a message at 
> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/3zbi71sjcJ8KaFgVIrF2Ymx4GC8/ 
> which lists the Responsible Area Director as a 
> Contributor.  In my opinion, the procedural 
> aspects are problematic.  I commented about a 
> somewhat similar topic previously [2].  From what 
> I understand, RFC 2026 is applicable for all 
> documents coming out of the IETF 
> Stream.  According to that RFC, the "procedures 
> are explicitly aimed at recognizing and adopting 
> generally-accepted practices".  One of the 
> definitions in RFC 7776 is: "A conflict of 
> interest may arise if someone involved in the 
> process of handling a harassment report is in the 
> role of Reporter, Respondent, or 
> Subject.  Furthermore, a conflict of interest 
> arises if the person involved in the process of 
> handling a harassment report is closely 
> associated personally or through affiliation with 
> any of the Reporter, Respondent, or 
> Subject".  The general practice, in such a 
> situation, is recusal.  I'll invite the 
> Responsible Area Director to comment about 
> whether there should be an exception to that practice and the rationale for it.

As stated twice on the list, by both by Martin and myself, the decision will be taken by Martin, not me:

> From: Martin Vigoureux
> Bruno being involved in the draft currently in WG LC, I will handle closing it.
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/w6VJzDYTVRFWOtvHuMso-kkiBXk/

> From: bruno.decraene@orange.com
> I've discussed this with our AD (Martin) and he agreed to make the formal decision to send the document to the next level. Thank you Martin.
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/or8086G4iYfee5_Icw4PnhkPLBo/

--Bruno

> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
> 
> 1. https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/spring/about/
> 2. https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/xBjDAIM4hdnSTyxL7QHlbiFX3eE/ 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> spring mailing list
> spring@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.