Re: Response to the Appeal by JFC Morfin dated 2006-02-17

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dear Pete,
your point is well made. An appeal to ISOC will be _considered_ after the appeal to the IAB (this is a part of the DoS imposed on me - and on the competing solution I introduced at the ITU/UNESCO meeting in Geneva :-)). However, there are four aspects to be considered.

1. the way the RFC 3683 is written. This is the point you address. Appeals period is over. IESG was wrong considering it. 2. what are RFC 3683 PR-actions as experimented (this is not the text, but the "running code" part). Usually running code is prior to the final text. In this case it is after. This PR-action is the first engaged. The two months delay is respected. IESG was wrong not considering it. 3. the way the RFC 3683 is applied. This is not the case addressed in that part, as you underline it. IESG did not considered it. 4. what the IESG's answer implies concerning the IETF core values. This is because RFC 3935 (written by the person who called for the PR-action) says the IETF technology is not neutral to these core values.

I indicated interoperability with the IETF solutions is my main concern. When the IESG answers an appeal it should speak the truth, this is why I introduced the point this way. IESG had to answer the point and I think the IESG spoke the truth. I do not like that truth because it leads to non-interoperable and not ethically acceptable situations (as we already experiment some).
jfc




At 16:23 17/07/2006, Pete Resnick wrote:

On 7/10/06 at 2:05 PM -0400, IESG Secretary wrote:

1. The appeal asserts that RFC 3683 (BCP 83) is illegal, and specifically in conflict with certain provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In particular it cites Article 10 (right to public hearing), 11 (presumption of innocence), 12 (privacy and reputation), 19 (freedom of expression) and 2 (non-discrimination).

Firstly, any appeal against the approval of RFC 3683 was due within two months of that approval, i.e. by February 17, 2004.

Secondly, the IESG believes that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not apply to the IETF's internal rules. IETF participants are assumed to be aware of IETF process rules before choosing to participate, and their participation is voluntary.

This part of the appeal is therefore rejected.

I think the IESG was correct to reject this part of the appeal, but I believe they rejected it for the wrong reason. The IESG simply should have not considered this part of the appeal at all. RFC 2026, section 6.5.3 is clearly applicable on this point:

6.5.3 Questions of Applicable Procedure

   Further recourse is available only in cases in which the procedures
   themselves (i.e., the procedures described in this document) are
   claimed to be inadequate or insufficient to the protection of the
   rights of all parties in a fair and open Internet Standards Process.
   Claims on this basis may be made to the Internet Society Board of
   Trustees.  The President of the Internet Society shall acknowledge
   such an appeal within two weeks, and shall at the time of
   acknowledgment advise the petitioner of the expected duration of the
   Trustees' review of the appeal.  The Trustees shall review the
   situation in a manner of its own choosing and report to the IETF on
   the outcome of its review.

Claims that RFC 3683 (a BCP, a document that has presumably already passed community consensus) is unfair ought not be taken up by the IESG or the IAB, but can only be taken up by the ISOC Board.

Appeals of this sort should not be brought to the IESG (or the IAB). I suggest that the IESG and the IAB always decline to decide such issues in the future should similar appeals come up.

pr
--
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
QUALCOMM Incorporated

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]