[rfc-i] RFC Editor structure

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Mon Sep 15 15:00:44 PDT 2008

On 2008-09-12 04:08, Bob Braden wrote:
> SM wrote: *
>   *> 
>   *> As in any structure, there is a need for accountability.  How is the 
>   *> Independent Streams Editor accountable to the community?  To whom is 
>   *> the RFC Editor accountable?
>   *> 
> The accountability and transparency of the Independent Streams
> Editor function are spelled out in some detail in RFC 4846.
> Bob Braden
> (Current incumbent in the Independent Streams Editor position)

My personal view at the moment is that the proposal put forward by
Olaf as a consensus candidate is more complicated than necessary.
I see nothing in the current model that will cause difficulty in the
processing and publication of the variously approved streams defined
in RFC 4844. There is a tactical argument for separating out the Publisher
function so that it could, in theory, be jointly contracted with other
IT services such as I-D publication. But that doesn't justify the separation
of the nominal "RFC Editor" warm body as a separate contractual entity.
I'd roll that into the Production contract.

The big virtue of the proposal is that it *clearly* separates the
Independent Submission Editor (and the related Editorial Board)
out as a free-standing community-volunteer peer-review activity and
I will swallow all the rest to get that result.


> 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 

I belive this description mixes roles. Just make the EB exclusively
support the Independent stream.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list