[rfc-i] RSOC oversight role

Olaf Kolkman olaf at NLnetLabs.nl
Wed Feb 16 12:53:48 PST 2011

On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:19 PM, Dave CROCKER wrote:

>> ?  I know it's legalistic, but that seems to be what this worry is
>> about.
> The legalistic tone really is just a touchstone to what I believe is a deeper problem, namely the expectation that anyone is going to be that aware and discriminating in their on-going behavior.  Besides the inherent challenge for anyone in that position, remember that most of us are rather less self-analytic, subtle, or aware of what makes for healthy oversight.,
> Again:  If we are in such dire straights that an RSOC must be involved in the details of the work, we have much bigger resource problems.  For one things, it is a demonstration of an inability to delegate.
> The rule should be simple and straightforward to say, think about and apply. This is not a topic that needs anything careful and precise because its application won't support it.

But isn't the rule is simple?:
 the IAB is ultimately responsible for oversight and acts as a body for appeal and resolution.

The RSOC members provide recommendations (public and transparent) based on community discussion for an IAB decision. Such should be pro-forma, but those recommendations should be public enough so that abuse is spotted.


--Olaf (<pun why="intended">The same olaf who is now involved in policy debate is part of the consensus calling body. Oopsss, what should I do? </pun>)


Olaf M. Kolkman                        NLnet Labs
                                       Science Park 140, 
http://www.nlnetlabs.nl/               1098 XG Amsterdam

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2210 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20110216/9509ec38/attachment.p7s>

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list