[rfc-i] RFC Editor Model Final Version?

Ray Pelletier rpelletier at isoc.org
Sat Sep 6 03:41:27 PDT 2008


inline
On Sep 5, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:

>
>
> Folk,
>
> Given the little amount of public feedback I got I once went to my  
> inbox again, talked to a few people and tried to come up with a  
> straw-man that addresses the tension points.
>
> 1) The interaction of the RFC editor and its environment.
>
> In the text below that is addressed by calling out that the RFC  
> editor is responsible for identifying the steps that need to be  
> taken and to call out that the IAOC is responsible to asses if those  
> steps have been taken by the other parties. Obviously the RFC editor  
> will be involved in that assessment.
>
> 2) Off line it was beeing made clear that the Editorial board  
> currently advices/works with the RFC Editor about issues that will  
> fall under the role of the 'RFC Editor function'. In the text below  
> that role is called out too, in addition it is made clear who is  
> responsible for the appointment of board members (I picked the  
> Independent Stream Editor for that).
>
> 3) It was also made clear off-line that it is not quite clear how  
> the RFC Editor can continue the "Branding" of the series when the  
> publication function moves into the IETF secretariat. I tried to  
> address that by extending the "Style Manual" responsibility  
> somewhat. Maybe there is a better way to phrase that.
>
> I realize these a quite a few changes but I think they reflect the  
> consensus of the folk that I've heard both on- and off line.
>
> So... the text below is a straw-man for the consensus document.  
> Please respond before end of next week if you have specific issues  
> otherwise this is what we start with.
>
> I will try to get this text published on the IAB website ASAP. At a  
> later stage this will be turned into a proper I-D and then published  
> as an RFC. However the goal is to have this serve as the basis for  
> 2009's RFI/RFP process.
>
> --Olaf
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
>
> The RFC Editor Structure
>
> Introduction
>
> The IAB, on behalf of the Internet technical community, is concerned  
> with ensuring the continuity of the RFC Series, orderly RFC Editor  
> succession, maintaining RFC quality, and RFC document accessibility.  
> The IAB is also sensitive to the concerns of the IAOC about  
> providing the necessary services in a cost effective and efficient  
> manner.
>
> The definition of the RFC series is described in RFC 4844.
> Section 3.1 defines "RFC Editor":
>
> 3.1. RFC Editor
>
> Originally, there was a single person acting as editor of the RFC
> Series (the RFC Editor).  The task has grown, and the work now
> requires the organized activity of several experts, so there are RFC
> Editors,
s/editors/Editors
or strike so there are RFC Editors
> or an RFC Editor organization.  In time, there may be
> multiple organizations working together to undertake the work
> required by the RFC Series.  For simplicity's sake, and without
> attempting to predict how the role might be subdivided among them,
> this document refers to this collection of experts and organizations
> as the "RFC Editor".
>
> The RFC Editor is an expert technical editor and series editor,
> acting to support the mission of the RFC Series.  As such, the RFC
> Editor is the implementer handling the editorial management of the
> RFC Series, in accordance with the defined processes.  In addition,
> the RFC Editor is expected to be the expert and prime mover in
> discussions about policies for editing, publishing, and archiving
> RFCs.
>
> RFC 4844 envisions changes in the RFC Editor organizational  
> structure. The IAB considered a change to increase flexibility and  
> operational support options, provide for the orderly succession of  
> the RFC Editor, and ensure the continuity of the RFC series, while  
> maintaining RFC quality, maintaining timely processing, ensuring  
> document accessibility, reducing costs, and increasing cost  
> transparency.
>
> Expenses for the RFC Editor
>
> The expenses discussed in this document are not new expenses.  They  
> arepart of the IASA budget.  Today, these expenses are part of the  
> RFC Editor contract with ISI.
>
>
> IAOC implementation
>
> The model is constructed in such a way that it allows for all these  
> functions to be implemented jointly or under different contracts.   
> In fact, a bidder could put together a proposal that includes one or  
> more subcontractors.  Since the reporting structure would depend on  
> how the manner that the contracts are awarded, they are subject to  
> change over time.  As a result, the model does only describe  
> responsibilities, procedures, and process.  The exact implementation  
> is a responsibility of the IAOC.
>
>
> Proposed RFC Editor Model
>
> The proposed RFC Editor model divides the responsibilities for the  
> RFC Series into the following:
> 	1.	RFC Editor
> 	2.	Independent Submission Editor
> 	3.	RFC Production
> 	4.	RFC Publisher
> The RFC Series Production and Process under this structure is  
> schematically represented by the figure below.
>
>
> RFC Editor
>
> The RFC Editor is a single person, and this person is responsible for:
> 	1.	Identifying appropriate steps for RFC Series continuity
> 	2.	Participate in IAOC reviews of the RFC Publisher and RFC  
> Publication
> 		functions to ensure the above mentioned continuity
> 	3.	RFC Style Manual publication for use by authors, editors, and  
> the RFC publisher
> 	4.	RFC errata process management
> 	5.	Liaison with the IAB
>
>
> After identifying the appropriate steps for RFC continuity the  
> implementation of those steps lay with the RFC production and  
> publishing functions. Since it is the IAOC that maintains oversight  
> of the implementation RFC Editor participation in reviews of that  
> implementation is expected.
>
> The RFC Editor is a senior managerial position with a strong  
> understanding of the IETF process and seasoned management skills and  
> is supported by the RFC Editorial board (see below).
>
> The IAOC has two alternative selection methods; it may consider in  
> an RFI and subsequent RFP.

Strike ' it may consider in an RFI and subsequent RFP.' as the 2nd  
alternative of community selecion and IAB confirmation falls outside  
an RFP process
>
>
> The first alternative for the selection of the RFC Editor is through  
> a Request for Proposal (RFP) process run by the IAOC.  As in the  
> first alternative, the IAOC would seek a person with the listed  
> qualifications in a broadly distributed RFP.  The winner would be  
> selected by the IAOC in consultation with the IAB, and then, the  
> IAOC would contract for the services.  Contract terms, including  
> length of contract, extensions and renewals, shall be as defined in  
> an RFP.  The opportunity to bid shall be broadly available.   
> Expenses to support the administrative operation of the RFC Editor  
> would be part of the awarded contract and be part of the IASA budget.
>
> The second alternative is an individual with the listed  
> qualifications selected by the community and confirmed by the IAB.   
> An approach similar to the one used by the IAB to select an IAOC  
> member every other year as described in RFC 4333 could be used.   
> Expenses to support the administrative operation of the RFC Editor  
> selected in this manner would be part of the IASA budget.

Does either of these alternatives contemplate a salary or stipend for  
the RFC Editor, which is likely to be a part time position?  Or is  
this ore akin to the volunteer positions like the IESG, IAB and IAOC  
for which there is no salary or stipend?

>
>
>
> Independent Submission Editor
>
> The Independent Submission Editor is a single person, and this  
> person is
> responsible for:
>
> 	1.	Independent Submissions approval and processing
> 	2.	Forwarding RFCs in the independent stream to the RFC Publisher
s/RFC Production/RFC Publisher
>
> 	3.	Independent Submissions RFC errata review and approval
> 	4.	Appointment of RFC Editorial Board members, see below
>
> The Independent Submission Editor is a senior position for which the
> following qualifications are desired:
>
> 	1.	Technical competence
> 	2.	Deep familiarity with the RFC series
> 	3.	An ability to assess the technical competence of potential  
> Editorial Board members
> 	4.	Good standing in the technical community in and beyond the IETF
>
>
> The  individual with the listed qualifications selected by the  
> community and confirmed by the IAB.  An approach similar to the one  
> used by the IAB to select an IAOC member every other year as  
> described in RFC 4333 could be used.  Expenses to support the  
> administrative operation of the Independent Submission Editor  
> selected in this manner would be part of the IASA budget.

See questions above regarding Editor salary or stipend.

Ray
>
>
> RFC Production
>
> In the proposed split of activities, RFC Production is performed by  
> a paid contractor, and the contractor responsibilities include:
>
> 	1.	Editing inputs from all RFC streams to comply with the RFC Style  
> Manual
> 	2.	Creating records of edits performed on documents
> 	3.	Engaging in dialogue with authors when clarification is needed
> 	4.	Creating records of dialogue with documents authors
> 	5.	Requesting advice from the RFC Editor as needed
> 	6.	Provide suggestions to the RFC Editor as needed
> 	7.	Coordinating with IANA to obtain registry information
> 	8.	RFC number assignment
> 	9.	Forwarding ready-to-publish documents to the RFC Publisher
> 	10.	Forwarding records of edits and author dialogue to RFC Publisher
> 	11.	Liaison with IESG and IAB
>
> The RFC Production contractor is to be selected by the IAOC through  
> an RFP process, possibly as part of the same contract as the RFC  
> Editor.  The IAOC would seek a bidder who, among other things, is  
> able to provide a timely and cost effective service against the  
> established style and production guidelines.  Contract terms,  
> including length of contract, extensions and renewals, shall be as  
> defined in an RFP.  The opportunity to bid shall be broadly available.
>
>
> RFC Publisher
>
> In the proposed model, the RFC Publisher responsibilities include:
>
> 	1.	Announce and provide online access to RFCs
> 	2.	Provide online system to submit RFC Errata
> 	3.	Provide online access to approved RFC Errata
> 	4.	Provide backups
> 	5.	Provide storage and preservation of records
> 	6.	Authenticate RFCs for legal proceedings
>
>
> Implementation of the RFC publisher function can be pursued  in two  
> different ways.
> The first alternative is to extend the IETF Secretariat contract to  
> include these services. Expenses to support these services would be  
> part of the revised contract. The second alternative is a separate  
> vendor selected by the IAOC through an RFP process. Expenses to  
> support service would be part of the awarded contract.
>
>
> The RFC Editorial Board
>
> Today the RFC Editor is supported by an Editorial Board.  This Board  
> will continue as it stands, to support the Independent Submissions  
> Editor's review work and provide input and guidance to the RFC  
> Editor. The appointment of board members will be the responsibility  
> of the Independent Submission Editor. The Independent Submission  
> Editor will work with the RFC Editor
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list