[rfc-i] [IAOC] RFC Editor Model Final Version?

Olaf Kolkman olaf at NLnetLabs.nl
Tue Sep 9 04:39:43 PDT 2008


On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:36 PM, Bob Braden wrote:

>
>
>
>> 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.
>
>
> You have not yet resolved the terminology confusion about whether
> the "RFC Editor" is a person or a "collection of experts and  
> organizations".
> The first paragraph above clearly says the latter; the 2nd paragraph
> implies the former.  If you intended the "expert technical editor and
> series editor" to be a "collection of experts and organizations",
> then you are in worse trouble than I can imagine. ;-)


Bob, this confusion is due because of loss of presentation detail in  
the mail. Two paragraphs where quoted from RFC4833 section 3.1. The  
singular "RFC Editor" in RFC4844 is decomposed in a number of  
functions under this model. That one of the functions has the same  
name as the overall is a matter of history. Maybe we could fix that by  
calling the "RFC Editor"-function something like "RFC Series Editor".  
Off course that would give rise to the same confusion.


I've made a mental note that if we ever go through a process like this  
again we use the tools people are used to: I-Ds.

>
>
>> 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.
>
>
> If "reducing costs and increasing cost transparency" means
> micro-managing the RFC production and publication operations,
> then I think you will not meet the rest of the IAB/IETF goals for
> the RFC Editor.
>

Nowhere in the plan is there a proposal for micromanagement of the  
functions.

>
>> RFC Editor
>>
>> The RFC Editor is a single person, and this person is responsible  
>> for:
>
>
> Whoops, there, you directly contradicted yourself.
>
>

See above, maybe it helps if we would add the word "Function" behind  
the four functional components presented.

>
>
>> The RFC Editor is a senior managerial position with a strong
>
>
> It is unclear that the RFC Editor [person] will manage anything under
> this structure.  His/her role would seem to be advisory to the IAOC,
> which will do the management.
>
>
>
>
>>        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
>
> How about building and maintaining tools and scripts to improve  
> efficiency and
> improve service?
>

Personally I would argue this to be an implementation issue i.e. part  
of the statement of work.



--Olaf
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 235 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://mailman.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20080909/6cebd628/PGP.bin


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list