[rfc-i] a possible refinement to draft-iab-rfc-editor-model

Ray Pelletier rpelletier at isoc.org
Sat Apr 11 10:57:12 PDT 2009


On Apr 11, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Russ Housley wrote:

> Ray:
>
>> >   . Name of the committee -- "Framework Committee" meant nothing
>> >     to some people.  Proposed "RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG)"
>> >     (per Russ' suggestion to rfc-interest)
>>
>> The 'Advisory Group' name suggests a different governance  
>> relationship
>> than I think is needed.
>> I would consider the group more the RFC Series Oversight Committee
>> (RSOC), which I believe
>> better suggests its role and responsibilities, and its position vis a
>> vis the RFC Series Editor
>> and the IAB better.
>
> As a counterpoint, let me say why I suggested the name that I did.   
> The IAB is already responsible for the oversight of the RFC series  
> as a whole, and so it seems to me they are also responsible for the  
> oversight of the RFC Series Editor.  I think that "Advisory Group"  
> is more appropriate because the group is intended to help the RFC  
> Series Editor by offering a broader perspective.  As Leslie said in  
> here earlier message, "keeping the flame."
>
> I think it is important that the name of this group not be perceived  
> as moving the oversight responsibility away from the IAB.  Rather,  
> the group is to advise the RFC Series Editor and also share their  
> perspective with the IAB as needed.

Actually I view the Group/Committee as more than an advisory role to  
the RSE.  I see the RSE reporting to the Group/Committee.  The name  
would be as the IAB would view it.  I was suggesting RFC Series  
Oversight Committee (RSOC) as the IAB empowering the group to perform  
that function on their behalf on a day-to-day basis based on the  
membership's expertise (who they appoint) with specific reporting and  
approval requirements to the IAB as the IAB deems fit.

Ray

>
>
> Ray, I do like the addition that you suggest at having this group  
> develop job descriptions for appointed positions (these would go to  
> the IAB as part of their confirmation process) and having this group  
> develop Statements of Work (SOW) for contracted components (these  
> would go to the IAOC for the procurement process).  If others agree  
> with the SOW development, then it is a good idea that an IAOC member  
> as an ex-officio member to provide an important linkage for the  
> procurement.  I'm not sure it needs to be the IAOC chair.  I think  
> it can be the chair or a liaison from the IAOC.
>
> Russ
>
>



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list