[rfc-i] a possible refinement to draft-iab-rfc-editor-model
sm at resistor.net
Sat Apr 11 16:01:10 PDT 2009
At 15:17 10-04-2009, Leslie Daigle wrote:
> . Separating initial population of the board from the eventual
> population of it; using the existing RFC Editor advisory board
> for the initial population
That's a good idea as it allows the model to evolve. It also ensure
a smoother transition period.
Will the RSAG continue to support the review work of the Independent
>RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG)
>The purpose of the RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG) is to provide
>expert, informed guidance (chiefly, to the RSE) in matters affecting the
>RFC Series operation and development. Such matters include, but are not
>limited to, issues in operation of the RFC model components, and
>consideration of additional RFC streams, to give a sense of the range of
>The RSAG is chartered by the IAB. As such, it operates independently of
>the IAB to fulfill that charter, and provides periodic reports to the
>IAB via the RSE. It is composed of members selected for their
As it's an advisory group (to the RSE), it would be up to the RSE to
provide periodic reports to the IAB. The RSAG can assist the RSE with that.
>In order to assist with a smooth transition of the RFC Editor function,
>the members of the existing RFC Editor Editorial Board who are willing
>to do so are asked to serve as an interim RSAG, effective as of the time
>of approval of this document. Within one year from the time the RFC
>Editor function transitions to the new model and after consideration of
>the operation of the new model in practice, the interim RSAG and RSE
>will formulate a recommendation to the IAB about the regular composition
>and selection process for the permanent RSAG.
Thinking aloud, it may be better to have a longer transition period.
More information about the rfc-interest