[rfc-i] draft-iab-streams-headers-boilerplates-06: overlooked details?

John C Klensin john+rfc at jck.com
Wed Aug 26 15:31:00 PDT 2009

--On Wednesday, August 26, 2009 09:46:51 -0700 Bob Braden
<braden at ISI.EDU> wrote...

>> publication.  Other than for normative reference holds, there
>> does not appear to be any mechanism for saying to the RFC
>> Editor: "this document is approved for publication, but not
>> really, and we will tell you when you can publish it or if we
>> want to change it further".
> Weeeellll, ... the IESG has been known to do exactly that. Not
> to  mention a few authors who want to make
> not-quite-substantive changes in AUTH48 ;-(

And that is _exactly_ why this needs to be clarified.   With the
new, four-body, system, one can easily imagine all sorts of
back-channel holds -- asking the publisher to not post, the
production house to not release documents, etc.  I believe that
the integrity of the system and the preservation of a reasonable
level of openness and transparency requires that, if a document
comes out of a stream and into the RFC Editor process, any
"approved but not really" holds need to be explicit, exposed to
the community, and involve the RSE (at least at a notification
level).   That is independent of the conditions under which a
hold request should be honored: I am focused here only on
avoiding back channels and actions for which no one needs to
take public responsibility.

I hope that, under the new Model, any suggestion for a
non-editorial change at AUTH48 gets the document immediately
returned to the stream  approver body for instructions.   I also
believe that evaluation of whether a change is substantive will
have to be sorted out between the Production House and RSE if
there is any possible doubt (such decisions affect the quality
and integrity of the Series).  I would also hope that there
would be no mechanism for anyone to prevent posting of a
document that had gone through AUTH48, been signed off on by all
relevant parties, and properly released from the Production
House to the Publisher.  That is, once a document goes over that
wall, no one gets to impose a hold.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list