Appeal of IESG decision to defer action and request that ISE publish draft-klensin-dns-function-considerations (John Klensin; 2017-11-29) - 2017-11-29
Appeal - 2017-11-29
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:35:02 -0500
From: "John C Klensin" <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: draft-klensin-dns-function-considerations@ietf.org,
iesg-secretary@ietf.org, "The IESG" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Appeal of IESG decision to defer action and request that ISE
publish(was: Telechat update notice: )
CC: "IETF Secretariat" <ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org>, "Nevil
Brownlee" <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>, "Nevil Brownlee" <rfc-ise@rfc-
editor.org>
IESG: When the procedures for IESG review of Independent
Submissions were first established and as they have evolved, the
IESG took on an implicit obligation to do those reviews on a
timely basis. At least absent a clear justification and/or a
document that raises specific complex issues, a month ought to
be more than enough. Ah additional two-week postponement of the
review date on 24 hour's notice is particularly troublesome.
I note that this document was carefully written to be an
explanatory opinion piece and critique, that it contains no
language that could be construed as a protocol specification,
that an earlier draft was briefly discussed on the DNSOP WG
Mailing list and that discussion didn't even hint at overlaps
with the work of that WG. The chances of interference with
current IETF work are about zero.
It is, however, somewhat important wrt timing because there are
pending publications and actions outside the IETF and RFC Editor
context that refer to and depend on it. Long delays have real
impact and do not reflect well on the IETF or the Independent
Submission process.
Thanks for your prompt consideration.
john
--On Wednesday, November 29, 2017 01:49 -0800 IETF Secretariat
<ietf-secretariat-reply@ietf.org> wrote:
Hide quoted text
Telechat date has been changed to 2017-12-14 from 2017-11-30
Datatracker URL:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-klensin-dns-f
unction-considerations/