[rfc-i] RSOC oversight role
glenn at RiverOnce.com
Wed Feb 16 07:44:54 PST 2011
On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
> On Feb 15, 2011, at 10:44 PM, Glenn Kowack wrote:
>> In order to maintain a clear line between the oversight role of the
>> RSOC and the development role of the RSE, I recommend adding
>> the following sentence to Section 3 of draft-kolkman-rse-2011-02,
>> probably immediately after the 3rd sentence:
>> "RSOC and its members should abstain from direct participation
>> in policy-making or formation of policy-making committees, which
>> would interfere with RSOC's oversight role."
>> FYI, Section 3 follows:
>> 3. RSE oversight
>> The IAB is responsible for oversight over the RFC Series.
>> In order to provide continuity over periods longer than the nomcom
>> appointment cycle and assure that oversight is informed through
>> subject matter experts the IAB will establish a group that implements
>> oversight for the IAB, the RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC).
>> The RSOC will act with authority delegated from the IAB: In general
>> it will be the RSOC that will approve consensus policy and vision
>> documents as developed by the RSE in collaboration with the
>> In those general cases the IAB is ultimately responsible for
>> oversight and acts as a body for appeal and resolution.
>> For all aspects that affect the RSE itself (e.g. hiring and firing)
>> the RSOC prepares recommendations for the IAB but final decision is
>> the responsibility of the IAB. For instance the RSOC would:
>> o perform annual reviews of the RSE and reports to the IAB.
>> o manage RSE candidate selection and advises the IAB on candidate
>> appointment (in other words select the RSE, subject to IAB
>> It is expected that such oversight by the IAB is a matter of due
>> diligence and that the reports and recommendations from the RSOC are
>> approached as if they are binding.
>> There is one aspect in which the RSOC will work with the IASA: the
>> renumeration of the RSE itself. The RSOC will propose a budget for
>> approval to the IASA.
> Dear Glenn;
> I think that there needs to be text stating that this be done in a timely matter. For example (see BCP101) the IASA budget has to be
> presented to the ISOC BoT, so the RSE budget request needs to be available to the IAOC well in advance of that, to be integrated with the overall budget. If the IAOC feels that this request is out-of-line, or likely to cause budget shortfalls in tight financial times, there has to be time to communicate that back to the RSOC and address the issue. Likewise, the IAOC works on a 3 year budget cycle, so the RSOC needs to provide budget projections as well.
Good point - timely budget participation, matching planning cycles, etc., is critical. I'm presently working on the RSE Statement of Work (SOW) and will see how inclusion of your point is appropriate there.
Given that, I'm not sure timeliness needs to be cited in this document. It's usually one layer down, generally assumed, and probably not something that's the subject of consensus. That said, and pending additional comment, I should leave the issue of inclusion to Olaf since he holds the consensus doc pen at the moment.
>> The RSOC will be responsible to ensure that the RFC Series is run in
>> a transparent and accountable manner.
>> The RSOC shall develop and publish its own rules of order.
>> rfc-interest mailing list
>> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
More information about the rfc-interest