Sam Hartman wrote:
"Brian" == Brian E Carpenter <brc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Brian> Reviewing procedures is fine. Reviewing specific awards
Brian> isn't, IMHO, which is all I intended my words to exclude.
Attempting to undo a specific award once things are signed (or
delaying signing) is generally unacceptable. Reviewing a specific
award to come to conclusions like "we failed to follow our
procedures," is definitely problematic but IMHO sometimes necessary.
Such reviews need to be handled with great care: some of the data used
to make the decision may not be available to the reviewing body and
much of the data must not become public. Also, if you conclude that
you did follow the wrong procedures in a specific incident but are
stuck with the contract because it is already signed, that creates all
sorts of bad feelings and potential liability.
Exactly. And we need to be sure that the "appeals" text allows for
review of procedures, including the kind of "case study" you suggest,
without allowing the appeal procedure to be used for commercial
food-fights. It's tricky to get that exactly right.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf