[rfc-i] The proper role of an RSE

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Fri Jan 7 13:32:09 PST 2011


On 2011-01-06 03:57, Paul Hoffman wrote:
...
> I will now publicly express a concern that I have expressed privately to
> many of the parties involved, but to no avail: we have heard barely
> anything substantial from the individuals on the RSAG, the people who
> are closest to the center of this decision. Other than some thoughtful
> contributions from Brian and Bob Hinden, the other RSAG members
> responses have been meta-responses about how the community is supposed
> to be discussing this. Many RSAG members haven't said anything on this
> list.
> 
> In my discussions with some RSAG members I know, they made it clear that
> there is no RSAG consensus. That's fine, but it sounded like there were
> some strongly-held views among the members based on what they have seen
> over the years, and particularly this year. We're not hearing those in
> this discussion, even though RSAG members have much more experience with
> the issues than the rest of us. As Glenn has said many times, the RSAG
> has seen much of what he is doing as he does it, whereas most of us have
> not.
> 
> (If I'm wrong here and the RSAG members have reported to the IAB, I
> apologize. However, reading such a report would be useful to the rest of
> us who are supposed to be discussing the proposal.)

RFC 5620 says:

   The purpose of the RSAG is to provide expert, informed guidance
   (chiefly, to the RSE) in matters affecting the RFC Series operation
   and development.
   ...
   The RSAG is chartered by the IAB.  As such, it operates independently
   of the IAB to fulfill that charter, and provides periodic reports to
   the IAB via the RSE.

So, to be legalistic, there's no obligation on the RSAG to report
directly to the IAB or in any way to the community. And, by the way,
I think we are still the "interim RSAG" as described at the end of
section 4.1.2 of 5620, since we still have a transitional RSE.

In any case - IMHO it is quite correct that there is no identified
consensus of the RSAG; we've been advising Glenn on successive drafts,
but there has been no attempt to form a consensus. That's often the
nature of an advisory group.

Other RSAG members may disagree...

   Brian


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list