[rfc-i] RFC Editor Model Final Version?

Ray Pelletier rpelletier at isoc.org
Tue Sep 9 06:52:28 PDT 2008


On Sep 9, 2008, at 7:46 AM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:

>
> On Sep 6, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Ray Pelletier wrote:
>
>> inline
>> On Sep 5, 2008, at 12:23 PM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
>
>
> <snip>
>>
>>> 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?
>
> Ray, from the above it is not entirely clear to me what you are  
> trying to propose.
>
> The intention of the text is that the model allows for two choices:
> o Selection by the IAB and expenses payed
> o Selection by the IAOC under contract (which includes a salary)
>
> I assume that you propose to add a third variety of how the function  
> could be fulfilled into the model:
> o Selection by the IAB with a stipend
>
> Or is it that you would like to fix the model with only one  
> selection method for the IAOC to use? I would not favor that as it  
> removes flexibility for the implementation.

I can live with that for the flexibility it provides over the long term.
>
>
> Could you explain your argument for adding the 3rd option?

I believe the 3rd method is a hybrid of the two that addresses two  
issues:
1. the community process with an IAB selection is a better method imho  
for identifying and vetting a well qualified individual to serve as  
the RFC Editor; and
2. providing a modest incentive as a stipend plus expenses will help  
attract  individuals to this position

Ray
in my community hat

>
>
>
> --Olaf
>



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list