[rfc-i] RSE relationship to the IAOC
glenn at riveronce.com
Thu Jan 20 19:21:53 PST 2011
On Jan 20, 2011, at 9:46 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> On 2011-01-19 23:31, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
>> On Jan 18, 2011, at 9:27 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>> - 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.)
>> Personally(!) I believe that the RFC should give a strong recommendation on the membership, but should allow the committee to evolve. In other words, I see this group as a committee of the IAB whereby the membership is described in SHOULD rather than MUST terminology.
>> Obviously a future IAB has the responsibility to explain why they would not follow the recommendation when appointing a committee.
>> Is that still in line with what you both are envisioning?
> Yes, we'd be foolish to have too many MUSTs when setting up a
> structure like this. We need flexibility.
This is also the approach I've been taking, including in my most recent reply to
Bob Hinden on details of REOC membership: guidelines plus a very few rigid
requirements. And hard requirements must be well-motivated, such as those
that pertain to avoiding conflicts of interest.
More information about the rfc-interest