[rfc-i] IAB Call for Comment on "The RFC Editor Model (Version 2)"
evnikita2 at gmail.com
Wed Jun 29 19:33:41 PDT 2011
I'm for publication of this document and have 2 minor comments.
I see this draft is going to in fact replace what was previously defined
in RFC 5620. Then I don't see why this document isn't going to obsolete
that one. In this case, it will be indicated that Version 1 of RFC
Editor model is no more to be used in favor of Version 2.
In Section 2.3:
> [RFC Production Center]:
> 9. Coordinating with IANA to perform protocol parameter registry
In RFC 5620 we had corresponding relation in the Figure 1:
> ------ --v--------v----------v-----------v-----
> | | | |
> | IANA |<->| RFC Production Center<
> | | | |
> ------ -----------------^----------------------
which I can't find in the current document. I personally think it
won't be redundant to mention this here, for clarity.
30.06.2011 0:49, IAB Chair wrote:
> The IAB has issued a Call for Comment on "The RFC Editor Model
> (Version 2)", a document under development within the IAB Stream [RFC
> 4845]. The document is available for inspection here:
> "The RFC Editor Model (Version 2)" reflects one year of experience
> with RFC Editor Model version 1 [RFC 5620]. It describes IAB
> oversight of the RFC Series via delegation to the RFC Series Oversight
> Committee (RSOC), as well as the relationship between the IETF
> Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) and the RSOC. The IAB and
> IAOC maintain their chartered responsibility as defined in [RFC 2850]
> and [RFC 4071], so that changes to those responsibilities are out of
> The review period will last until July 30, 2011. If you have read
> the document and have comments, please send comments to iab at iab.org,
> with a CC: to rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org. If you have read the
> document and approve without any suggested changes, please also
> respond stating your opinion.
> Information on the changes made in the latest version of the document
> is provided in the message from Joel M. Halpern (editor) below.
> [For the IAB],
> Bernard Aboba
> IAB Chair
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: *Joel M. Halpern* <jmh at joelhalpern.com>
> Date: Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 2:25 PM
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-iab-rfc-editor-model-v2-02.txt
> To: "rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org" <rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org>
> A new version of this document has been posted.
> Based on the discussions that led to it, I wish to call the
> rfc-interest list's attention to two items in the document. Please
> use a separate subject line in following up, and select the
> appropriate copy list.
> Before I get to the two comments, a note of thanks. The IAOC provided
> significant restructuring of the document. This made the document
> MUCH more readable. Thank you.
> 1) The IAOC provided specific text describing the vendor selection
> process. This is intended to preserve the spirit of the previous
> versions of the document, while aligning it with BCP 101 and being
> clearer about what has to actually happen. Several folks have
> expressed concern that it also changes the the degree to which the RSE
> is involved in the selection. Others expressed disagreement. This
> text has been reviewed by the IAB, but input from the broader
> community is sought.
> 2) As the RSOC began working, it was noted that the requirement in
> this document for documentation of the rules of the RSOC, and of the
> selection process for the RSE, seem much more strict here than in RFCs
> guiding other selection processes and bodies. The text may well be
> more onerous than is needed to ensure suitable community transparency.
> Opinions on whether this can be relaxed, and suggested text, are
> Thank you,
> Joel M. Halpern
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce at ietf.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest