RFC Editor Model
draft-editorial-rswg-rfc9280-updates-00

Network Working Group                                         P. Hoffman
Internet-Draft                                                     ICANN
Updates: 7990, 7991, 7992, 7993, 7994, 7995,                    A. Rossi
         7996, 7997, 9280 (if approved)     RFC Series Consulting Editor
Intended status: Informational                              4 March 2025
Expires: 5 September 2025

                            RFC Editor Model
                draft-editorial-rswg-rfc9280-updates-00

Abstract

   RFC 9280 specifies version 3 of the RFC Editor Model.  Since its
   publication, lessons have been learned about implementing this model.
   This document lists some of those lessons learned and updates RFC
   9280 based on that experience.

   This draft is part of the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG); see
   https://datatracker.ietf.org/edwg/rswg/documents/
   (https://datatracker.ietf.org/edwg/rswg/documents/).  There is a
   repository for this draft at https://github.com/
   paulehoffman/9280-updates (https://github.com/
   paulehoffman/9280-updates).

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 5 September 2025.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2025 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Methods for Updating RFC 9280 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  RPC Roles and Responsibilities  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  RPC Implementation Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       3.1.1.  Tooling and code used for publication of RFCs . . . .   3
       3.1.2.  Conflict Resolution for Implementation Decisions  . .   5
     3.2.  RFC Consumers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.3.  Updates to RFCs 7990 through 7997 . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Updates from "RFC Formats and Versions" . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  RFCs May Be Reissued  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Consistency Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Purview of the RSWG and RSAB  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Processing Drafts from the RSWG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   [RFC9280] contained significant changes to the publication model for
   RFCs.  Those changes created new structures and new processes for the
   publication of RFCs.  As these structures and processes have been
   exercised, the community has found places where they might be
   improved.  In addition, gaps in some of the processes have been
   found.  This document updates RFC 9280 based on these findings.

   An editorial note: RFC 9280 is discussed throughout this document.
   The only time it is formally referenced is above; the rest of the
   time, it is simply called "RFC 9280".

   A later version of this document will have all the changes in place
   in RFC 9280.

2.  Methods for Updating RFC 9280

   Section 8 of RFC 9280 currently says:

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

      Updates, amendments, and refinements to this document can be
      produced using the process documented herein but shall be
      published and operative only after (a) obtaining the agreement of
      the IAB and the IESG and (b) ensuring that the IETF LLC has no
      objections regarding its ability to implement any proposed
      changes.

   This sentence is replaced with:

      Updates, amendments, and refinements to this document can be
      produced using the process documented herein but, unless otherwise
      specified in this document, shall be published and operative only
      after (a) obtaining the agreement of the IAB and the IESG and (b)
      ensuring that the IETF LLC has no objections regarding its ability
      to implement any proposed changes.

3.  RPC Roles and Responsibilities

   RFC 9280 created a new structure for the RFC Editor function.  It
   established the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG) and the RFC Series
   Approval Board (RSAB), and gave new responsibilities to the RFC
   Production Center (RPC).  Broadly speaking, it says that RSWG writes
   policies for the editorial stream, RSAB approves those policies, and
   the RPC implements those policies.  However RFC 9280 does not specify
   which group is responsible for defining or building the specific code
   and tools that implement the policies agreed upon in this process.
   The rest of this section updates RFC 9280 to deal with this and other
   related matters.

3.1.  RPC Implementation Responsibilities

3.1.1.  Tooling and code used for publication of RFCs

   Section 2 of RFC 9280 says

      Policy implementation through publication of RFCs in all of the
      streams that form the RFC Series.  This is primarily the
      responsibility of the RFC Production Center (RPC) as contractually
      overseen by the IETF Administration Limited Liability Company
      (IETF LLC).

   The same section also states

      The RPC implements the policies defined by the Editorial Stream in
      its day-to-day editing and publication of RFCs from all of the
      streams.

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

   RFC 9280 does not define any other group that is responsible for
   implementing policies.

   Throughout RFC 9280, the RSWG is consistently assigned responsibility
   for writing policies (not deciding on implementations).  The RPC is
   consistently assigned responsibility for implementing policy
   decisions, but examples given generally describe decisions made at
   the single document level.  RFC 9280 does not cover any specific
   responsibilities for designing and building the tools and code used
   to publish documents.

   RFC 9280 mentions tool developers twice.  In Section 3.1.1.2, it
   encourages "developers of tools used to author or edit RFCs and
   Internet-Drafts" to participate in the RSWG.  Section 3.2.1 says that
   "RSAB members should consult with their constituent stakeholders
   (e.g., authors, editors, tool developers, and consumers of RFCs) on
   an ongoing basis".

   Section 4.2 of RFC 9280 mentions a specific implementation when
   discussing the working practices of the RPC.

      In the absence of a high-level policy documented in an RFC or in
      the interest of specifying the detail of its implementation of
      such policies, the RPC can document ... Guidelines regarding the
      final structure and layout of published documents.  In the context
      of the XML vocabulary [RFC7991], such guidelines could include
      clarifications regarding the preferred XML elements and attributes
      used to capture the semantic content of RFCs.

   [RFC7991] is the only editorial implementation-related RFC mentioned
   in 9280.

   This section updates RFC 9280 to specify that the RPC is responsible
   for the development of tools and processes used to implement
   editorial stream policies, in the absence of an RFC with specific
   requirements.  The RPC may designate a team of volunteers and/or
   employees who implement these operational decisions.  The RPC is
   expected to solicit input from experts and community members when
   making implementation decisions.  The RPC is required to document
   implementation decisions in a publicly available place, preferably
   with rationale.

   If the RPC has questions about how to interpret policy in Editorial
   stream documents, they should ask RSAB for guidance in interpreting
   that policy per the process described in Section 4.4 of RFC 9280.

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

3.1.2.  Conflict Resolution for Implementation Decisions

   Section 4.4 of RFC 9280 provides a pathway for resolution of
   conflicts between the RPC and the author(s) of a specific document.
   No appeal pathway is given for resolution of issues that may occur
   when a conflict arises with an implementation decision that applies
   to the entire editorial process (not just one document).

   If the RPC is responsible for interpreting policy decisions at both
   the document and editorial process tooling level, conflicts on either
   level will involve interpretation of written policy (or the
   acknowledgement that policy does not exist to cover a given
   situation).  In any case, the conflict resolution will now use the
   same path of appeal: to the RSAB.

3.2.  RFC Consumers

   The IETF mission statement [RFC3935] is clear that the documents it
   produces are intended to be consumed by anyone who wishes to
   implement an IETF protocol or operational recommendation:

      to produce high quality, relevant technical and engineering
      documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage
      the Internet in such a way as to make the Internet work better.

   Section 3.2.1 of RFC 9280 introduces the term "consumers of RFCs",
   referring to them as "constituent stakeholders" who should be
   considered by RSAB when approving Editorial Stream policy documents.

   "Consumers of RFCs" is now defined to mean those people who read RFCs
   to understand, implement, critique, and research the protocols,
   operational practices and other content, as found in RFCs.

   The policy to be followed by the RFC publication streams and RFC
   Editor in respect of consumers of RFCs is as follows:

   *  Consumers of RFCs MUST be considered as a separate constituent
      stakeholder from IETF/IRTF participants.  While IETF/IRTF
      participants and others involved in the development and production
      of RFCs may be consumers of RFCs, the two are distinct,
      overlapping sets.

   *  The RFC Editor website (https://www.rfc-editor.org) MUST be
      primarily focused on consumers of RFCs.

   *  Consumers of RFCs MUST NOT be required or expected to become IETF/
      IRTF participants, but it MAY be recommended or suggested that
      they do so.

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

3.3.  Updates to RFCs 7990 through 7997

   All instances of "RFC Editor" or "RFC Series Editor" in [RFC7990],
   [RFC7991], [RFC7992], [RFC7993], [RFC7994], [RFC7995], [RFC7996], and
   [RFC7997] are replaced by "RFC Production Center (RPC)".

4.  Updates from "RFC Formats and Versions"

   [RFC9720], "RFC Formats and Versions", updated RFC 9280.

4.1.  RFCs May Be Reissued

   Section 7.6 of RFC 9280 currently says:

      Once published, RFC Series documents are not changed.

   That sentence was replaced with:

      Once published, RFCs may be reissued, but the semantic content of
      publication versions shall be preserved to the greatest extent
      possible.

4.2.  Consistency Policy

   A new policy that would exist in Section 7 of RFC 9280 was added:

      7.8.  Consistency

      RFCs are copyedited, formatted, and then published.  They may be
      reissued to maintain a consistent presentation.

5.  Purview of the RSWG and RSAB

   Section 3 of RFC 9280 currently says:

      Policies under the purview of the RSWG and RSAB might include, but
      are not limited to, document formats, processes for publication
      and dissemination of RFCs, and overall management of the RFC
      Series.

   The following is added immediately following that sentence:

      Such policies will not include detailed technical specifications,
      for example specific details of text or graphical formats or XML
      grammar.  Such matters will be decided and documented by the RPC
      along with its other working practices, as discussed in section
      4.2 of RFC 9280, with community consultation as for other tools
      and services supported by IETF LLC [RFC8711]."

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 6]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

6.  Processing Drafts from the RSWG

   %% Maybe clarify RSAB role in running the full-community last call,
   such as deciding when it is finished, what the RSWG Chairs should do
   after that, mailing lists, and so on. %%

7.  Security Considerations

   There are no security considerations for the changes listed in this
   document.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document contains no actions for IANA.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC7990]  Flanagan, H., "RFC Format Framework", RFC 7990,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7990, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7990>.

   [RFC7991]  Hoffman, P., "The "xml2rfc" Version 3 Vocabulary",
              RFC 7991, DOI 10.17487/RFC7991, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7991>.

   [RFC7992]  Hildebrand, J., Ed. and P. Hoffman, "HTML Format for
              RFCs", RFC 7992, DOI 10.17487/RFC7992, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7992>.

   [RFC7993]  Flanagan, H., "Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) Requirements
              for RFCs", RFC 7993, DOI 10.17487/RFC7993, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7993>.

   [RFC7994]  Flanagan, H., "Requirements for Plain-Text RFCs",
              RFC 7994, DOI 10.17487/RFC7994, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7994>.

   [RFC7995]  Hansen, T., Ed., Masinter, L., and M. Hardy, "PDF Format
              for RFCs", RFC 7995, DOI 10.17487/RFC7995, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7995>.

   [RFC7996]  Brownlee, N., "SVG Drawings for RFCs: SVG 1.2 RFC",
              RFC 7996, DOI 10.17487/RFC7996, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7996>.

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 7]
Internet-Draft              RFC 9280 updates                  March 2025

   [RFC7997]  Flanagan, H., Ed., "The Use of Non-ASCII Characters in
              RFCs", RFC 7997, DOI 10.17487/RFC7997, December 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7997>.

   [RFC8711]  Haberman, B., Hall, J., and J. Livingood, "Structure of
              the IETF Administrative Support Activity, Version 2.0",
              BCP 101, RFC 8711, DOI 10.17487/RFC8711, February 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8711>.

   [RFC9280]  Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "RFC Editor Model (Version 3)",
              RFC 9280, DOI 10.17487/RFC9280, June 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9280>.

   [RFC9720]  Hoffman, P. and H. Flanagan, "RFC Formats and Versions",
              RFC 9720, DOI 10.17487/RFC9720, January 2025,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9720>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3935]  Alvestrand, H., "A Mission Statement for the IETF",
              BCP 95, RFC 3935, DOI 10.17487/RFC3935, October 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3935>.

Authors' Addresses

   Paul Hoffman
   ICANN
   Email: paul.hoffman@icann.org

   Alexis Rossi
   RFC Series Consulting Editor
   Email: rsce@rfc-editor.org

Hoffman & Rossi         Expires 5 September 2025                [Page 8]