[rfc-i] [IAOC] RFC Editor Model Final Version?
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
> You have not yet resolved the terminology confusion about whether
> the "RFC Editor" is a person or a "collection of experts and
> 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
>> The IAB considered a change to increase flexibility and operational
>> support options, provide for the orderly succession of the RFC
>> 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
>> RFC Editor
>> The RFC Editor is a single person, and this person is responsible
> 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
>> 2. Creating records of edits performed on documents
>> 3. Engaging in dialogue with authors when clarification
>> 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
>> 10. Forwarding records of edits and author dialogue to RFC
> 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.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
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