Hi Daniel > On 13 Dec 2024, at 13:49, D. J. Bernstein <d...@cr.yp.to> wrote: > > Jay Daley writes: >> I took your note to me as invoking the escalation path that RFC 9680 >> provides information on and consulted with counsel and the response >> is, as previously conveyed, that your concern should be addressed >> through the standards process. > > Thanks for your message. I have three clarification questions, on-list > for transparency. > > First, am I correctly understanding that IETF LLC is refusing to take > corrective action regarding the Cisco incident that I pointed out?
As set out in BCP 101 (RFC 8711) the IETF LLC has "no authority over the standards development activities of the IETF" and explicitly has no role in the part of the standards process around conflict resolution "no changes are made to the appeals chain". As this is clearly an issue of the IETF standards process, there is no concept of IETF LLC "corrective action". > Second, is IETF LLC going to provide transparency regarding its > rationale for this? This question appears to be based on the misconception that the IETF LLC could take "corrective action" and if it chooses not to then it should explain why not. As explained above, we can’t do something we can’t do. > The comments I've seen from IETF LLC aren't saying > anything explicitly about the incident. It would be inappropriate for the IETF LLC to make an explicit statement about the comment made to this list that you are concerned about, as that would violate the limitations above regarding the role of the IETF LLC. > Third, is there a mechanism to appeal this decision to IETF LLC? Yes, you can appeal any action I take (including this non-action ) to the IETF LLC Board. I suggest sending any appeal to llc-bo...@ietf.org which reaches the LLC Board only (I am not a board member). For full disclosure, please note that one of the chairs of this WG is an IETF LLC board member (https://www.ietf.org/administration/llc-board/ for further details). > A > generic reference to "the standards process" doesn't distinguish actions > by IETF LLC from actions by other parties; the reason I sent email to > you in the first place was to request IETF LLC action. I understand why you may have thought that the IETF LLC could be asked to intervene as many other SDOs operate under a different model where the legal entity has that level of authority. The IETF however is quite different as the authority over the standards process is delegated by the IETF community to the IESG and the IETF LLC sits outside of that. That is why the standards process appeal chain (as pointed to by the WG chairs in their recent message) is to the IESG and not the IETF LLC. Jay -- Jay Daley IETF Executive Director exec-direc...@ietf.org _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
