Re: Appel due to management of the "site-local issue"

[Leif Johansson <leifj@it.su.se>]

Thomas Narten wrote:

> To be clear, are you filing a formal appeal? If so, you need to be
> very clear about which action you are appealing, on what grounds, what
> the remedy should be, and so forth. Also, per 2026, the first place to
> start with an appeal is the chairs. Only if you are not satisfied with
> their response would you go to the next level.
>  
I am filing a formal appeal and I hope that both the grounds for the appeal,
the actions appealed and the remedy were clear from my email. If not I
appologize.

> I gather then that you believe that there is already consensus for
> Bob's "choice A", and that even offering choice B (and C) is
> inappropriate.
>  
Correct. The choices B and C actually imply that site-locals will be 
used which
in no way can be construed as "deprecating" site-locals. Given the 
complexity
of the issues and the time ipv6-wg has spent to date it is not entierly 
clear that B
and C imply anything other than full deployment of site-locals on the 
Internet
for the forseeable future.

> In anycase, clarification would be helpful.
>  
I am new to the appeals process. Could you please tell me what in my 
original
message needed clarification. Thanks!

> Thomas
>  
      Cheers Leif