[rfc-i] RESEND: RFC Editor Model Version 5 and revised RSE SOW

Jim Schaad ietf at augustcellars.com
Fri Apr 24 15:32:33 PDT 2009


Olaf,

I have two concerns that I would like to register with the latest draft.

1.  In the dispute resolution chain, if one has a conflict between say the
publishing house and the production center, and a single entity has the
contract for both the production center and the RSE - Should the RSE
actually be the final authority on all dispute resolutions?  One assumes
that there would be no actual appeal for the Publisher in this case as the
RSE would have been involved in direct negotiations with the production
center.

2.  Appendix A talks about how the selection process would happen "if that
position is not covered by the RFC Production Center contract"  Should the
community and other entities (such as the ad-hoc committee) be expected to
have input on the selection of the RFC Production Center in cases where it
is additionally bidding to become the RSE?

Jim Schaad


> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfc-interest-bounces at rfc-editor.org [mailto:rfc-interest-
> bounces at rfc-editor.org] On Behalf Of Olaf Kolkman
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 10:27 PM
> To: RFC Interest
> Subject: [rfc-i] RESEND: RFC Editor Model Version 5 and revised RSE SOW
> 
> 
> [This is a resend, the original mail contains two attachments which
> make it sit in the moderator queue, attachments have been substituted
> by (non-stable) references]
> 
> 
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> I have updated the RFC Editor model document and introduced the concept
> of the RFC Series Advisor Group(RSAG), as discussed on this list under
> the subject "a possible refinement to draft-iab-rfc-editor- model".
> 
> The document can be found at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-iab-rfc-editor-model-05
> and the changes between this and the previous version at:
> http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-iab-
> rfc-editor-model-05.txt
> 
> I think I captured the consensus in that the RFC Series Editor has been
> assigned responsibilities for the implementation of, identification of
> issues with, and driving changes of RFC policies.
> All this with the RSAG available as fairly independent, involved, and
> stable source of continuity, and the IAB as clearly asserting its
> oversight responsibility but being at arms-length.
> 
> The changes in the model also come with changes in the RFC Editor SOW.
> I have added a PDF and DOC file with the changes compared to the most
> recent IAOC published SOW.
> 
> The IAB will need to make a decision next monday. And while the SOW can
> after monday be tweaked to add possible omissions we will need to
> proceed with the next steps.
> 
> I realize that there is only a few days left between this publication
> and the decision, but your input is welcome.
> 
> --Olaf
> 
> 
> SOW:
> doc format: http://www.secret-wg.org/RFC-Series-Editor-SOW-model-5.doc
> pdf format: http://www.secret-wg.org/RFC-Series-Editor-SOW-model-5.pdf



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list