[rfc-i] RSE and RAOC: IAB state, developing consensus, and strawman.

Brian E Carpenter brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Sat Jan 22 11:46:46 PST 2011

On 2011-01-23 08:31, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> On 1/22/2011 10:54 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> On 2011-01-23 05:01, Dave CROCKER wrote:
>>> Where are these terms and their IAB status documented?
>> I'd go a bit further. It doesn't matter what these terms mean IMHO.
>> They describe structures set up by the IAB on an 'at will' basis
>> and they don't seem robust against future changes in thinking by
>> future IABs. I want to see the REOC set up by an RFC that will
>> have at least as much sticking power as RFC 4071 and RFC 2850.
> Yes, but...
> Getting formal IETF approval with RFC publication is known to be a long
> and arduous process for IETF process documents.  If the RFC is merely an
> IAB document, then it has little protection against the concern you
> raise; so it needs IETF approval.
> But yes, the IETF approval should be sought.
> The question is whether we have to wait for it?  The answer to that is
> that we can't.  We need things in place to get on with hiring an RSE.
> So having the IAB issue a "charter" of some sort, with IAB approval, is
> the most pragmatic next step, IMO.

Yes indeed, and the IAB has the authority to do this IMNSHO. (Not so
humble, since I personally wordsmithed the IAB charter.) The RFC can
come along later.


More information about the rfc-interest mailing list