"trouble maker"

Hallam-Baker, Phillip pbaker at verisign.com
Tue Jun 24 13:21:18 CEST 2003

That is not the point I raised which was a failure of the IETF WG process,
not the appeals process.

The fact that the same individual can abuse the original WG process and then
participate in the appeals process is relevant however. In fact it is even
possible in theory for a single individual to chair the original WG and
participate in both the original and IAB appeal if the IESG/IAB liason were


> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Seng [mailto:jseng at pobox.org.sg]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 3:10 PM
> To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip
> Cc: 'problem-statement at alvestrand.no'
> Subject: Re: "trouble maker"
> If you pursue the appeal process as documented in RFC 2026 and you 
> failed despite having all evidences that you should win, I will agree 
> that you have a case to state this as a problem.
> But you choose not to use the process. And your decision to pursue an 
> alternative appeal *does not* indicate a failure of the IETF 
> appeal process.
> -James Seng

More information about the Problem-statement mailing list