[rfc-i] RFC Editor Model discussions

IAB Chair iab-chair at iab.org
Fri Aug 30 09:41:09 PDT 2019


Dear Colleagues,


As you will have seen from the RSOC's message to the community, the RSOC 
is seeking input on an SOW for a temporary RFC Project Manager focused 
on the tactical aspects of the RSE position, in order to allow for a 
community process considering changes to the RFC Editor Model to complete.


If the community supports moving forward with that approach, a key 
question becomes how to ensure that the evolution process completes 
successfully and in a timely fashion.  There are several choices of how 
to proceed, each of which has differences in who convenes the process, 
who manages it, and who calls consensus. Among the choices would be an 
open membership IAB program, an IETF GEN area working group, or a group 
convened from within the RFC Editor system itself (e.g. by the stream 
managers).


In order to ensure that we have feedback on the structure of the 
community process, Heather will convene three interim meetings prior to 
IETF 106, each intended to allow those from different time zones to 
participate.  The tentative plan is for a September 13th meeting to be 
targeted at Americas-friendly time zones, for a September 30th meeting 
to be targeted at European and African time zones, and for a meeting 
over the October 17th/October 18th date to be targeted at Pacific and 
Asian time zones.  Exact times and logistical details will be provided 
as soon as possible.


After these initial meetings, there will be a meeting held at IETF 106 
to discuss a proposal for the structure of the community process.  That 
meeting will again be convened by Heather, possibly with a co-chair. 
List confirmation or further discussion of any tentative conclusions 
will take place on the rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org 
<mailto:rfc-interest at rfc-editor.org>mailing list.


These steps to establish community consensus for a specific process are 
somewhat unusual, and the IAB recognizes that adding them may slow the 
overall process.  We believe, however, that they are needed given the 
community concerns raised to date. We also hope that clear community 
consensus for the process used will arise, and that this will help 
ensure that the eventual results of the process are acceptable to the 
community as a whole.

regards,

Ted Hardie

for the IAB

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/attachments/20190830/f54b9cfc/attachment.html>


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list