[rfc-i] RSE role

Glenn Kowack Glenn at RiverOnce.com
Thu Jan 20 11:02:02 PST 2011

On Jan 20, 2011, at 3:45 AM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> On 19.01.2011 20:54, Ted Hardie wrote:
>> ...
>> So, I think the key point here is that cross-stream coordination role
>> that the RSE has is specific to editorial and publications points,
>> since content has been explicitly ruled out.  Leading discussions on
>> those points actually requires pretty significant expertise with them,
>> or the policy that's returned may be unimplementable and/or way out of
>> the mainstream.
>> Ideal from at least my perspective is someone who has both that
>> experience and IETF experience, but that's a pretty limited set and
>> the number of hours/pay may well make it the null set.  So we're left
>> with the question:  is it easier to grow a member of the community in
>> this domain, or easier to get someone with this domain knowledge to
>> build a reputation inside the community?  As long as we're clear that
>> we want the intersection at the end of the day, I think we can reach
>> this point, but it will take time either way.
>> My personal take is that absent the ideal case, it will be better to
>> hire someone with publication experience and grow their knowledge of
>> the community they will serve.  The risk in the other direction is
>> that we will have a respected member of the community who becomes
>> increasingly familiar with the way we already do publication, with
>> little to know exposure to how others do it.  That might limit our
>> ability to evolve the series to meet new needs.
>> ...
> +1 on the analysis in general.
> On the choice between these two extremes, I'm not that sure. Having IETF experience *would* be good; maybe Glenn could inform us about how long it took him to get up to speed about how things happen here.

   The short answer: 6 months.  Details: It took me roughly
	- 6 weeks to get a solid first-order understanding of all the moving parts that make the  Editor
		(including the IETF in Anaheim), the Series, the I*, and the RFC process, and to get to
		know the major players;
	- 2-3 months to get a good grasp the details behind those, and
	- 4-6 months to progressively nail down the vast majority of the remaining subtleties of the system.

It is significant that I did not receive any organized orientation; mine was largely self-organized.
RSAG members were enormously important to that, and they were very generous with their time. A
structured orientation (which I recommend in draft-kowack-rfc-editor-model-v2-motivations-00) will
make an big difference and could especially reduce the time required for a relative outsider.

Please note that my work has been heavily weighted toward TRSE analyses and commendations.
The new RSE should be able to focus far on RFC Editor issues and development, which could also
reduce the time required (or at least increase the steepness of the early part of the learning curve).

> On the other hand, I'd *also* appreciate an non-IETF point of view. I think one of the problems the future RSE will have to address *will* be publication formats, and for that it certainly is important not to start with a "we always did it this way" attitude.

A fresh perspective could indeed make a huge difference in how we collectively think about editor issues.


> Best regards, Julian
> _______________________________________________
> 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