As you should be aware, the Ombudsteam investigates complaints of
harassment, as RFC 7776 describes:
...problematic behavior that may be more
personal and that can occur in the context of IETF activities
(meetings, mailing list discussions, or social events) that does not
directly disrupt working group progress but nonetheless is
unacceptable behavior between IETF Participants. [Sec. 1]
and does so "when other IETF policies and procedures do not apply or
have been ineffective." [Sec. 1]
If the Ombudsteam finds that harassment has occurred, it can impose a
remedy. Such remedies can be up to and including "that the Respondent is
no longer permitted to participate in a particular IETF activity, for
example, ejecting them from a meeting." [Sec. 5.1] One other such remedy
might also include revoking posting rights to IETF mailing lists or
restricting posting to only specific addresses. This is independent of
the BCP 83 PR-Action, and importantly because of the confidentiality
requirement of RFC 7776 does not involve a community Last Call:
o In all cases, the Ombudsteam will strive to maintain
confidentiality for all parties, including the very fact of
contact with the Ombudsteam. [Sec. 5]
The Ombudsteam takes the imposition of any remedy extremely seriously
and always tries limits its actions to only the minimum remedy that will
"make sure that the incident does not escalate and to ensure that a
similar situation is unlikely to occur with the same Respondent in the
future." [Sec 5.2] There is an appeals mechanism in RFC 7776, but the
requirements laid out in RFC 7776 mean that such remedies could be
imposed without notifying the community. We wanted to make sure that the
community is aware of this.
