[rfc-i] Short summary of IAB discussion
dhc at dcrocker.net
Mon Jan 10 09:20:10 PST 2011
On 1/10/2011 2:32 AM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
> I believe there is a big difference between strategic I* folks being that are
> 'donated' by sponsoring organizations and ISOC hiring strategic staff on
> behalf of the 'greater IETF'. Jon Postel was a leader/strategist by nature,
> he and all RFC Editors assumed strategic responsibility implicitly.
The Chairs have always been selected, and it's been very formal for a very long
That a company donates the funding is important in some ways, but does not
change the nature of the position's responsibilities.
> I am not spending very many words on this because I believe that we all agree
> that a strategic role is needed and that a discussion about the above might
> be distractive.
In fact I think there is a basic confusion between tactical work and strategic
work. The interest in having the RSE edit documents and otherwise perform
low-level, tactical tasks reflects the former. The interest in having the RSE
provide higher-level management, focus on developing proposals and support for
enhancements, and the like, are examples reflects the latter.
> Clarification question, to make sure I understand we are talking about the
> same: "The change being proposed" is the change that Paul proposes?
More information about the rfc-interest