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

[Olaf Kolkman]

Folk,

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  
some specifics.

- 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  
welcome.

  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  
be stable.



--Olaf


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
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