[rfc-i] RFC Editor structure
olaf at NLnetLabs.nl
Fri Sep 19 08:01:08 PDT 2008
Bob , question for you in-line
On Sep 16, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> 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.
The role of the EB has been made more explicitly only recently and
having the Board adice both the Indep. subm. appr. and the RFC Editor
function seemed a good idea.
Maybe you could loosely describe whether there is any advice that the
Editorial board gives nowadays that are related to the
responsibilities that we identify for the RFC Editor function?
For reference, these were those functions:
• Identifying appropriate steps for RFC Series continuity
• Participate in IAOC reviews of the RFC Publisher and RFC Publication
functions to ensure the above mentioned continuity
• RFC Style Manual publication for use by authors, editors, and the
• RFC errata process management
• Liaison with the IAB
In another mail Brian wrote:
> The IAB is the guardian of the series. I don't think we *need*
> a separate warm body in that role, now that we have clearly separated
> out the guardian of the Independent stream.
That is a fair point, and it is intended to be captured in the
responsibility to liaise with the IAB. The idea is that the RFC Editor
function really implements the 'day to day' work of sustaining the
look and feel and has the ability to flag the real policy issues that
come up and bring those (possibly with advice) to the IAB.
You described that role as another IAB slot. I tend to look upon that
RFC Editor function as a role that needs much more on top than the IAB
can actually be.
That does still not really answer the reason why you would want to
separate the role from the production house within the model. The
reason for that is the difference in skill set you need for the two
functions and also that the two functions might get different
contracting cycles, that in order to allow for continuity.
-------------- 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/20080919/22045cec/PGP.bin
More information about the rfc-interest