[rfc-i] Comprehensive review of draft-iab-rfc-editor-model-v2-02 - RSOC

SM sm at resistor.net
Sun Jul 10 09:41:28 PDT 2011


Hi John,
At 20:50 09-07-2011, John C Klensin wrote:
>(B.27) The organizational location of the RSOC.
>
>Most of the document is insensitive to the difference, but we
>have various bits floating around that describe the RSOC as an
>"IAB Project" and others, including Section 3.1, that describe
>an IAB-established "group" (whatever that is).  Depending in
>part on what the IAB does with "Projects", it might make a
>difference.  In particular,
>
>    * If I understand the way the IAB intended "Projects", they
>         are really integral to the IAB with added outside members.
>         Remember that, while the capability has not been used in
>         recent years and is not explicit in RFC 2850 (the IAB
>         Charter), the IAB has always been able to include
>         participants not listed in the Charter in its meetings and
>         discussions as long as they are not part of the voting
>         process for formal IAB decisions and actions.  Such
>         Projects are really part of the IAB but, as such, they
>         probably shouldn't have line-item budgets in the IASA
>         process as this document seems to require for the RSOC in
>         the second paragraph of 4.2.  Instead, the RSOC should be
>         budgeted for as part of the IAB budget, just like other
>         IAB Projects, workshops, and other operations.
>
>    * By contrast, if the RSOC is some sort of IAB-established
>         "Group", it is not clear whether, under RFC 2850, the IAB
>         has the ability to delegate as much authority and
>         responsibility for the RFC Editor function to it as this
>         document contemplates (and the IAB may need a committee or
>         Project to oversee the RSOC).  On the other hand, it would
>         be entirely reasonable for that sort of RSOC to have a
>         separate budget line.  Even then, having the RSOC be
>         considered part of the RFC Editor Function for budgetary
>         purposes (with the RSE preparing the budget) even though
>         the RSOC makes the RSE selection and oversees the RSE
>         might be considered a bit dicey.

The Abstract Section mentions that:

   "The Internet Architecture Board (IAB) oversight by way of
    delegation to the RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) is
    described, as is the relationship between the IETF
    Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) and the RSOC."

The IAB approves the appointment of an organization to act as RFC 
Editor and the general policy followed by the RFC Editor.  It is 
within the IAB's prerogative to decide whether it wants to delegate 
the finer details of that work to a committee, e.g. RSOC.   As nobody 
seemed to have any issue with the wording, it's easier for me to skip 
that debate.

The IAB runs various programs (you used the term project); one of 
which is for the RFC Editor function.  The RSOC cannot remain as an 
IAB program and be integrated into the RFC Editor function at the 
same time.  It seems that the IAB wants to spin off the program as a 
committee; another I* body.  As that raises questions that nobody 
wants to answer (one could argue that it is too early to ask the 
question), the model goes through twists and turns to get there.

This community used to have a quaint way to deal with such issues.

Regards,
-sm 



More information about the rfc-interest mailing list