[rfc-i] Developing consensus, episode 2: Who chooses the Production Center and Publisher

Ted Hardie ted.ietf at gmail.com
Tue Feb 8 17:54:06 PST 2011

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Dave CROCKER <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:

> As I said, I think that Olaf's language that has the RSE develop the SOW and
> select candidates is a huge improvement, with respect to RSE comfort.
> That's why I tried to be clear that there is an /added/ concern during
> actual
> contract negotiation.  All sorts of terms and conditions come up during that
> sort of process, beyond what is in an SOW.  Some of them are financial or
> administrative, but some of them pertain to the details of work.  Those are
> the type that the RSE needs to agree to.
> IASA has the responsibility for managing the contracting process and it has
> the
> authority to declare the contract to be signable.
> But it makes no sense to have IASA agree to whatever work details it
> prefers, if the RSE finds them unacceptable. It creates an unworkable
> arrangement.

I can see your concern, but I think the language you have is too strong.

IASA should consult the RSE if its negotiations result in changes to
the statement of work, but the final authority seems to me to rest with
them.  If the RSE doesn't want the production center staff to be fewer
than a thousand (to take a ridiculous example), she or he can't
withhold agreement
on a contract to force the hiring of additional folks.  IASA may simply not
be able to afford the desired situation.  Given the RSE's existing
roll in formulating
the SOW and evaluating the candidates, I think Olaf's language:

The IASA selects, negotiates and contracts and has final authority.

could be modified to

Based on the RSE and evaluation team's ongoing input, the IASA selects ,
negotiates and contracts and has final authority.

Is that close enough to what you're looking for?


Ted Hardie
> d/
> --
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list