[rfc-i] RSE relationship to the IAOC

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Tue Jan 18 12:27:42 PST 2011


Glenn,

Thanks for this very clear message. Just on one point:

> - The REOC may be constituted under the IAB's authority as defined in RFC 2850, 
> 	Section 2(d): ("The IAB must approve the appointment of an organization to 
> 	act as RFC Editor and the general policy followed by the RFC Editor.")


I completely agree. However, I do prefer to see the REOC constituted in
an enduring way, so that it doesn't appear to be a whim of the current
IAB membership. In other words, it needs an RFC, not just an IAB decision.
(Whether the RFC is an IAB stream document or a BCP is a tactical question.)

Regards
   Brian

On 2011-01-18 20:59, Glenn Kowack wrote:
> Recent discussion on this list, as well as my own phone discussions, point toward
> the following changes (since publication of the Overview in December) in RSE
> responsibilities as they relate to the IAOC.
> 
> Two background items:
> - The REOC may be constituted under the IAB's authority as defined in RFC 2850, 
> 	Section 2(d): ("The IAB must approve the appointment of an organization to 
> 	act as RFC Editor and the general policy followed by the RFC Editor.")
> - The TRSE recommendations identify that the RSE requires technical (as in 
> 	editorial and publications techniques) and managerial expertise.
> 
> It will occasionally, be necessary to revise existing (or create new) agreements for 
> contracted RFC Editor services (e.g,. the Production Center).  New contracts and 
> renewals use Statements of Work (SOWs) to describe all issues related to 
> contractor work performance. The RSE will lead community discussion on the 
> content of SOWs.  Using that input, the RSE will revise the SOW. The RSE will
> then support the IAOC in developing an RFP, with the RSE providing input related
> to technical-editorial SOW content.
> 
> All RSE activities will be done with the advice and consent of the REOC, whose 
> members are expected to maintain their own independent contact with the 
> community (per the Overview).
> 
> The RSE will evaluate the sufficiency of bids w/r/t the SOW, and will provide input
> to the IAOC. The IAOC will negotiate contract(s) with the winning bidder, with the 
> support of the RSE.
> 
> If during this process the RSE does not believe his recommendations and input 
> are being considered appropriately by the IAOC, then he can bring that concern
> to the IAB.
> 
> The above satisfies the need for technical-editorial expertise in revising (and 
> creating new) agreements while not interfering with the IAOC's execution of its
> responsibilities.  The above is also consistent with BCP 101, which identifies:
> 
> 	"The IASA is distinct from IETF-related technical functions, such as
> 	the RFC Editor, the IANA, and the IETF standards process itself.  The
> 	IASA has no influence on the technical decisions of the IETF or on
> 	the technical contents of IETF work.  Note, however, that this in no
> 	way prevents people who form part of the IASA from participating as
> 	individuals in IETF technical activities."
> 
> This email defines RSE (and REOC) expertise as technical, and thus appropriate 
> as described above.
> 
> -Glenn
> _______________________________________________
> rfc-interest mailing list
> rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest
> 


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list