[rfc-i] Role of the Editorial Board

Bob Braden braden at ISI.EDU
Mon Sep 22 13:15:21 PDT 2008


>
>I think it is fairly unrealistic to expect two boards with little
>overlap to be created at the moment we start implementing the model.
>In fact that would be a terrible idea. But allowing them to evolve
>separately and focus on their own expertise seems like a opportunity
>more than a thread.
>
>That said, I am interested in the other arguments you may have why two
>boards _is_ a terrible idea.
>
>--Olaf

Olaf,

Because it seems like needless administrative complexity and over-definition.

It seems to me that you will, by some mechanisms to be determined, choose
anRFC Editor and an IndSub Editor.  It seems to me that both should
be able to organize their efforts as they see fit.  This organization may 
include
choosing a group of people to provide advice.  They might choose the same
group of people -- and current experience shows that can work well.  A set of
senior technical people with a relatively long experience in the IETF is 
not a bad
recipe for a first-order set of IndSub reviewers.

In any case, with respect to the (re-) structure document, KISS.  Maybe it 
should
not even mention an Ed Board, whether one or two.  However, I thought the 
wording in an
earlier draft, noting the existence of the Ed Board but declaring its 
composition and
organization to be outside the scope of the document, seemed about right.

BTW, I would not be surprised if some members of the current Editorial Board
disagreed with me on this.  They not infrequently disagree with me ;-)(

Bob Braden








More information about the rfc-interest mailing list