[rfc-i] [IAB] Comments on RSE models

Paul Hoffman paul.hoffman at vpnc.org
Fri Jan 14 15:56:52 PST 2011


On 1/14/11 2:53 PM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thus, the parts of the two models visible to the community are
>>>> probably nearly identical; the difference is who is responsible
>>>> for acting after the discussion.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Paul,
>>>
>>> You have to explain what you mean with 'acting after the
>>> discussion'. Do you mean who is responsible for the 'act of
>>> determining the consensus'?
>>
>> Yes. By "after the discussion", I meant "after the community has
>> discussed the big question that was brought to it".
>>
>>> Because after the consensus is called policy needs to be
>>> implemented and that is the responsibility of the RSE, agreed?
>>
>> For some big questions that are answered, yes, but some of them
>> will be implemented by the Production Center and/or the Publisher.
>> For example, if the new community consensus is that in addition to
>> the canonical text format, the RFC Editor web site must also have a
>> non-canonical HTML version, it is not the RSE who implements this
>> change: instead, the RSE verifies that the Publisher does so. (I
>> think that is true in both Glenn's current model and my proposal,
>> but Glenn can speak to his.) The RSE might have to implement
>> changes to the web site to point to the new files, of course.
>
>
> Paul, I am loosing you. When I mean 'X implements' I do not mean that
> X does the hands-on work herself but that she is the responsible
> person for making sure the work happens and is properly budgeted and
> prioritized.
>
> In your model, who is is responsible for implementation in that
> meaning?

The REOC. In my model, the REOC is responsible for overall series 
management and stability and creates policy for the RFC series, and the 
RSE "takes direction from RSOC on new initiatives". I guess I should 
have said for the latter "takes direction from RSOC on initiatives", 
which would cover new, ongoing, and changed initiatives such as "a big 
question got answered".

> I am asking these questions because I have difficulties spotting the
> 10 differences between your and Glenn's model.

I'm not sure where the "10" came in, but in both models, it will be the 
RSE who is doing the legwork of being sure that the policy is 
implemented. However, the difference in the models is that in mine, if 
the RSE fails at it or takes too long, it is the REOC that is 
responsible; in Glenn's, I think the REOC does not have the 
responsibility to make sure the RSE is doing what the community asked.

Hope this helps. Glenn should have text at some point that will 
hopefully be able to be compared to my model and folks can find the one 
they feel most comfortable with, or pick a (hopefully clear) point between.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list