[rfc-i] a possible refinement to draft-iab-rfc-editor-model
olaf at NLnetLabs.nl
Mon Apr 20 08:34:07 PDT 2009
For the long and the short of it: by the end of this week we will need
have the essentials in place to move on. Therefore I want to focus on
- RFC Series Advisory Group.
From what I read on this list there seems to be (rough) consensus for
introducing the committee and having it seated with members from the
RFC Editorial board. The RSAG is chartered by the IAB and its members
are approved by the IAB. We will need to find language that is
somewhat similar to the IRSG membership language.
- IAOC matters related to the implementation.
Some points that relate to the current discussion and that I want to
report back from last weeks IAOC retreat. I am sure that Bob H. will
speak up if I misinterpreted the IAOC consensus.
a. One topic we discussed was the monetary arrangements for the ISE.
The IAOC seemed to be (informally) supporting the notion that there is
an expense account for the ISE but that there is no stipend or salary
for the ISE. The idea here is that the technical assessment of
documents for the other streams are all also volunteer based. Besides
the (only) RFI response we received for the RFI indicated that the job
could be done as a volunteer job. If people agree with this a simple
"1+" reply would help. If people oppose this idea, good arguments are
b. On the RSE it was understood by the IAOC that a relatively senior
person is needed and that there is negotiation space for the IAD. Note
that the RSE is thought to be about a 30-50% job initially but should
drop to a 20-30% job within, say, the year.
c. With respect to IAOC and IAB responsibility during the selection
of the RSE: The IAB does the appointment of the RSE and the IAD will
do the negotiations within the parameters set by the IAOC. The IAB
appointment will thus be subject to successful contract negotiation
with the IAD.
d. The SOW are still open for feedback. Note that the RSE SOW may
need a spin due to the introduction of the RSAG. The other SOWs should
-------------- 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/20090420/2273a89f/PGP.bin
More information about the rfc-interest